[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Poor Form? (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 11:02:11 -0700
From: "D.C. Cox" <DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net>
To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: Poor Form? (fwd)
to: Greg
The big point everyone misses with sonotubes is the release agent. This
agent will semiconduct at potentials above 500-600 kV. If your system is
running with a 5-6 ft. spark (or less) and is properly sealed with
polyurethane or other insulation (inside as well as outside) it will run
and perform well for a long time. The sonotubes are a poor choice when the
sparks get in the 8-12 ft. range -- they will work but their useful
lifetime is limited.
DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net
----------
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Poor Form? (fwd)
> Date: Thursday, February 12, 1998 10:16 PM
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:07:30 +0000
> From: "Gregory R. Hunter" <ghunter-at-mail.enterprise-dot-net>
> To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Subject: Poor Form?
>
> Dear Folks,
>
> Thanks for answering my query about sonotube. I've seen it before
> at construction sites, I just didn't know it was called "sonotube".
>
> One writer has suggested that this may be a poor choice of coil
> form. Is cardboard tube lossy or something? For low RF losses, I
> would think well-sealed cardboard would be nearly as good as air, and
> superior to PVC.
>
> Greg
>
> Dreaming of Megavolts in East Anglia, UK