[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: In vs. Out
From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com[SMTP:FutureT-at-aol-dot-com]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 1997 8:55 AM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: In vs. Out
In a message dated 97-07-27 10:28:20 EDT, you write:
<< at the risk of being somewhat of a radical here, why not try a totally
> different tact - let us imagine that input power is at least well defined
and
> in theory measurable (a hot wire and a photo cell being one way).
> Imagine a "quality" metric which is a function of 2 variables - spark
length
> and overall intensity. Max spark length can be measured,it's a number of
> meters (feet, centimeters, Ells, whatever unit you choose)
> Intensity can also be objectively measured - a convenient unit is total
> brightness, measured using a "standard" photo cell with a "standard" lens.
>This could be cheap stuff, like a silicon solar cell from Radio shack with
no
> lens, at a specified distance, or a cadmium sulfide photo resistor mounted
in
> a disposable camera body.
> The quality metric should give a bigger number for more brightness,and for
> more spark length. So, I would recommend something of the form:
> (brighness/K)*spark length
> Select K so that given agreed units of brighness (ohms mesured on the
standard
> cell, candellas, lumens per steradian, again, whatever you agree on) the
> result of a bright spark divided by K will be close to 1, that way a "weak
> spark" will be penalized in a standard maner, and a nice thick spark will
be
> suitably rewarded.
> Note that you would also want to average the reading over several seconds.
>>
William,
Nothing radical there, I was thinking of something similar. In theory this
should work. It solves the brightness variable. Somehow though, if
someone built a coil that gave a monstrously bright, but very short
spark, and we had to give it the same efficiency rating as a coil with
a much longer but dimmer spark...it just wouldn't seem "right"
somehow even though it is technically correct...hmmm.
John Freau