[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
RE: Arc length vs pwrRe: Arc length vs pwrRE: Arc length vs pwrRe: Arc length vs pwr
At 04:57 AM 10/4/96 +0000, you wrote:
>From gowin-at-epic-1.nwscc.sea06.navy.milThu Oct 3 22:48:08 1996
>Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:56:35 -0000
>From: Dan Gowin <gowin-at-epic-1.nwscc.sea06.navy.mil>
>To: "'tesla-at-pupman-dot-com'" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>Subject: RE: Arc length vs pwrRe: Arc length vs pwr
>
>
>
>----------
>From: Tesla List[SMTP:tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com]
>Sent: Thursday, October 03, 1996 12:24 AM
>To: Tesla-list-subscribers-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
>Subject: RE: Arc length vs pwrRe: Arc length vs pwr
>
>>From couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-netWed Oct 2 22:53:33 1996
>Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:55:59 +0000
>From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: RE: Arc length vs pwrRe: Arc length vs pwr
>
>At 04:25 AM 10/2/96 +0000, you wrote:
>>From gowin-at-epic-1.nwscc.sea06.navy.milTue Oct 1 21:46:43 1996
>>Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 08:17:53 -0000
>>From: Dan Gowin <gowin-at-epic-1.nwscc.sea06.navy.mil>
>>To: "'tesla-at-pupman-dot-com'" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>>Subject: RE: Arc length vs pwr
>>
>>
>>
>>----------
>>From: Tesla List[SMTP:tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com]
>>Sent: Saturday, September 28, 1996 5:25 PM
>>To: Tesla-list-subscribers-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
>>Subject: Re: Arc length vs pwr
>>
>>>From couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-netSat Sep 28 14:51:15 1996
>>Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 17:22:14 +0000
>>From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
>>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>>Subject: Re: Arc length vs pwr
>>
>
> <big snip>
>
>>Dan -
>
>The spark length data represents a typical Tesla coil. Your coil is not the
>typical
>coil that is represented by the graph. As I mentioned above the spark length
>can be
>increased by increasing the inductance of the secondary coil which you have
>done.
>There are many other possibilities.
>
>The spark length (output) of a Tesla coil is represented by the equation
> Output = Input - Losses All units in energy
>Your coil is obviously well built and has less losses than the typical coil.
>Most of the losses are in the primary spark gap, primary capacitor, and
>secondary
>coil windings. The resistance of the primary wiring and connections also can
>cause
>more than average losses. Homemade primary capacitors can cause big losses.
>
>Your coil is 1000 watts and gives a 2.5 foot spark. This is a rating of
>1000/2.5 ft = 400 watts per foot of spark. The typical coil rating for this
>size coil
>is 1000/1.7 ft = 588 watts per foot of spark. This rating system offers a
>convenient
>method to indicate the overall efficiency of Tesla coils. For example, a
>graph is
>shown in the Tesla Coil Notebook for Percent Efficiency vs Watts per foot of
>Spark.
>The graph shows about 50% efficiency for your coil compared to about 32% for a
>typical coil of this wattage..
>
> There are several ways the efficiency of Tesla coils can be represented but
>this
>method has the advantage that differences in both losses and improvements
>for the
>same wattage are taken into account.
>
>Let me know if you have other questions.
>
>Jack Couture
>
>
>Mr. Couture,
> I have reviewed my notes and was able to get 10 minutes worth of sparc out
of my current
>commercial capacitor bank. My sustained sparc length still stands at 30". I
still have a hard time
>believing my current system has a 50% efficiency rating. The laws of
physics have been broken
>here some how.
> I have conducted some careful measurements on my equipement and all of the
>values I've mentioned before are correct, with two exceptions. My neon
transformer pulls 14 Amps,
>not 9.9, and my capacitor banks rating falls off dramatically when its hot.
This last bit of information
>I'm not surprised about.
> I've just recently completed a stacked plate polyethylene capacitor bank,
to replace my
>current bank. But with the added prospects about how ineffecient home grown
capacitors could
>be, maybe I'll be disappointed.
>
>D. Gowin
> [Part 2, Application/MS-TNEF 4.4KB]
> [Unable to print this part]
>
>Dan -
I ran your new info thru the JHCTES computer program. For 120 volts, 14 amps
= 1680 watts input with a 19.0 mh secondary the program shows 640 watts per
foot of spark and an overall efficiency of 31.2%. Your coil appears to be
similar to a typical coil with this new wattage.
You said you did not believe your coil was 50% efficient and that the laws
of physics were broken. How do you calculate the efficiency of your Tesla
coils? Also, how did you determine the laws of physics were broken?
What are you using for a primary capacitor that gets hot during operation?
If you are careful building a homemade capacitor it might work better than
the one you are using now. Richard Hull can give you plenty of good
instructions for building your own capacitors.
Jack Couture