[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Safety FAQ is here -- draft, asking for comments.
>>From MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nzThu Aug 8 17:17:54 1996
>Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 10:21:41 +1200
>From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Re: Safety FAQ is here -- draft, asking for comments.
>Hi Robert,
> Thanks for the thoughts on this.
>> I merely wish to say that I think more research is needed here
>> before we can really understand what is happening around the top end.
>>
>> As for your laudable attempt to create a performance category by merely
>> observing the discharge, this may not be so easy as first imagined.
>> Standardization system or not however, I'm sure no one would object
>> to having their system performance classed as #1! ;-)
>I think I'll can the categorization attempt. After seeing the
>pictures in the Notes Guide, the operation does look fairly standard.
>My largest coil also exhibits attached streamers for a second or two
>before losing interest and looking for another target. The discharges
>in the connected channel are definitely oscillatory and sinking
>secondary power in a big way (critical coupling imposed).
> Perhaps my imagination went West. I'd sort of imagined a bit of
>corona at the top with bolts _suddenly_ roaring out for miles and
>attaching to a convenient object.
>Regards,
>Malcolm
Malcolm,
Don't give up yet on your idea for a discharge categorization scheme.
See my post to you and Richard Hull. BTW, I really like your idea of
bolts_suddenly_roaring out for miles!:)
regards, rwstephens