Re: impedance matched?

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net> 

Tesla list wrote:
 >
 > Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net>
 >
 > At 11:18 AM 3/12/2004 -0700, you wrote:
 > >Original poster: Mddeming-at-aol-dot-com
 > >Hi Laurence,
 > >     Many decades ago, in the era of analog computers, LC circuits were
 > > used to emulate the shock-absorber/spring combinations in automobile
 > > suspensions. Perhaps the engineering is reversible?
 > >
 > >Matt D.
 > >
 > >In a message dated 3/12/04 1:52:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
 > >tesla-at-pupman-dot-com writes:
 > >Original poster: "Laurence Davis" <meknar-at-hotmail-dot-com>
 > >
 > >I'm still toying with the idea of a physical model
 > >much like a tuning fork, but that models the Tesla
 > >coil resonance amplification.
 > >
 > >Does the primary tank impedance match the secondary when tuned?
 > >
 > >There is a mechanical analog to impedance and it wouldn't be too much of a
 > >stretch
 > >to reach reactance.
 > >
 > >dissimilar materials could be used to "delay" wavefronts to create a
 > >capacitor/inductor model.
 >
 > No stretch at all (horrible pun on springs..)
 >
 > Spring = capacitor
 > Mass = Inductor
 > Viscous damping = resistance
 >
 > Coupled inductors are a bit trickier, but I suspect there is a mechanical
 > analog.  Probably along the lines of a "T" model for transformers.

	A spring between the two masses will do it if the simulation uses
masses suspended by a spring (coupled pendulums).

Ed