[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Power versus Spark Length




From: 	DR.RESONANCE[SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent: 	Tuesday, July 22, 1997 5:15 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: Power versus Spark Length

To: Greg

A larger inductance should require a longer charging or risetime thus di/dt
would not remain constant for a larger inductor.  I believe Tesla referred
to this as "mass" or total amount of wire in the secondary inductor or
magnifier.  It would of course be possible to modify a design with a larger
inductor to regain the previous di/dt of another comparable system.

Increased inductance is typically added to a circuit to slow down the
risetime of a high voltage signal and hence to prevent oscillations in some
circuits such as impulse testing, etc.

Just thoughts on the fly!

DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net

----------
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> To: 'Tesla List' <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
> Subject: Re: Power versus Spark Length
> Date: Tuesday,July 22,1997 11:15 AM
> 
> 
> From: 	John H. Couture[SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> Sent: 	Monday, July 21, 1997 2:07 PM
> To: 	Tesla List
> Subject: 	Re: Power versus Spark Length
> 
> At 08:16 AM 7/21/97 +0000, you wrote:
> >
> >From: 	Greg Leyh[SMTP:lod-at-pacbell-dot-net]
> >Sent: 	Sunday, July 20, 1997 2:49 PM
> >To: 	Tesla List
> >Subject: 	Re: Power versus Spark Length
> >
> >Tesla List wrote:
> > 
> >> From:   John H. Couture[SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> >>
> >> >From:  Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
> >> >
> >> >> From:   John H. Couture[SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. Increasing/decreasing the secondary coil inductance would
> >> >> increase/decrease the spark length.
> >> >
> >> >Why? 
> >>        
> >> Because of  Vs = Ls di/dt
> >
> >
> >If you believe that di/dt remains constant while changing Ls, then 
> >why not make Ls as large as possible?
> >-------------------------------------
> 
> I do not believe that di/dt remains constant. This is involved with #3 of
my
> post. 
> 
> -------------------------------------
> >Regarding Vs,  I believe that if one applies Occam's Razor to the
> >problem, a simple equation ultimately determines the output voltage:
> >
> >Energy in Csec = (energy in Cpri) X (coil efficiency)
> >
> >The _only_ assumption that this equation relies upon is that energy
> >is always conserved.  Given that E = 1/2 CV^2, the output voltage
> >immediately follows from this equation.
> >
> >Comments?
> ------------------------------------------
>  
>   There is no way to measure the energy in the TC system that produced a
> single special long spark. How would  you measure the actual voltage that
> the Cp is charged to for that certain spark? Also, how would you
determine
> how many breaks were required before the Cp had enough voltage to fire
the
> operating spark gap? An osilloscope could not do the job. 
> 
>   However, if you use averaging methods rather than one shot methods, you
> can measure the watts input for a number of sparks over time (energy) and
> use the following equation. In this setup the Cp voltage is averaged over
a
> time period.
> 
>   Input W = .5 Cp Vp^2 BKS / Eff       (Per second)
> 
>  The energy output would be represented by the length of horizontal
> continuous sparks (controlled sparks) from the secondary terminal to a
> ground point. 
>  
> I admit this still leaves alot to be desired but is better than what we
are
> now doing.
> 
> --------------------------------------- 
> 
> >-GL
> >
>  John C.
> >
> >
> 
>