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

TC enfeeblement (deliberate)


----------
From:  John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
Sent:  Friday, February 20, 1998 3:52 PM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: TC enfeeblement (deliberate)


  Michael -

  One of the advatanges of using a computer program like the JHCTES is that
you can make changes in your coil via computer instead of building and
rebuilding coils. In this manner you can see how single and MULTIPLE changes
affect the coils output. Keep in mind that the computer recalculates all of
the parameters for the new changes. No program will ever be 100% accurate
for Tesla coils because of the nature of TC operation. 

However, there are millions of posible TC parameter combinations (JHCTES has
46) and building and testing them all is not feasible so using computer
programs can save a lot of time. But to make the programs reasonably
accurate good benchmarks are required and these can only be obtained by
building coils and testing them. The benchmarks can then be converted into
equations that a computer can use by math regression and other methods.

  I do not claim that the JHCTES gives 100% accuracy in its present form or
ever will but it is getting better and better as more data comes in from
coilers. Because this data for the program is from many coilers it is an
average of many tests, not an isolated test. The more test that coilers
perform and will publisize the results, the more accurate computer programs
will become.

  I understand that there are several TC programs out there that could be
made similar to the JHCTES program if they would combine and coordinate all
of the parameters at the same time. I believe these programs could be
enhanced to do this and even with more parameters if the developers can find
the time and motivation to work on them.

  Of course, real progress can only be made if coilers build and test their
coils and make the information available to other coilers.

  John Couture

--------------------------------------------------------------

At 11:00 PM 2/19/98 -0600, you wrote:
>
>----------
>From:  FutureT-at-aol-dot-com [SMTP:FutureT-at-aol-dot-com]
>Sent:  Thursday, February 19, 1998 9:04 AM
>To:  tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject:  Re: TC enfeeblement (deliberate)
>
>In a message dated 98-02-18 15:38:11 EST, you write:
>
><< John: 
>>It would be interesting to see what happens when you tweak only one
>> coil (assuming you can get resonance). You've twisted so many knobs 
>> that there really is no information here, other than bad choices
>> make for bad coils. One wonders if you had gotten 1500 turns of
>> your PVC wire what would have happened (besides the coil being
>> almost 6ft tall). Were coupling values the same?
>
>Michael,
>
>If I had the room, I would try a 6ft tall coil, and other experiments
>that require a lot of room.  I have to keep my projects confined within
>my available space.  I think there is some important info here, if it is
>considered along with various Tesla theories and other experiments
>which can help to fill out the picture.  Also, it gives 2 specific designs
>that builders can use as guidelines for the good and the bad.
>
>> We used to have a guy running our accelerator that had a tuning
>> technique we called 'Martinizing'. He'd tweak 3 or 4 settings in
>> one beam cycle. Which one affected the beam? Who the heck knew?
>
>Probably more is known about how a specific change in a Tesla
>design will affect performance (even a combo of changes such as
>I did), then is known about how 3 or 4 changes in an accelerator
>will affect the beam.  I don't think it's a fully valid comparison.
> 
>> Just a wag on my part, but I would guess that the primary plays a 
>> bigger role than the secondary in this situation. I don't know the
>> characteristics of that coax, but if it is 'lossy', and provides
>> resistance, would this not spoil the entire Q of the primary system,
>> preventing the energy transfer to the secondary?
>
>Yes, the coax uses a braided shield and is lossy and does get
>warm in operation which does spoil the Q, etc.
> 
>> Did any components get hot? If so, which ones, and where?
> 
>> My 6.5" system is wound on a poly form as well, and to date, my max
>> spark is only 36" with 720VA - mind you that strike left a char mark
>> on the wood ladder. I know one of my problems is quenching in my gap -
>> I am going to add a small sync rotary to my Cylinder gap - while I am
>> sure a monster vacuum would also help, It makes a lot of noise between
>> runs - and I gotta keep the wife happy.
>
>36" with 720VA is better than a lot of the coils I've been hearing about.
>Good luck with the gap work.
>
>John Freau
> -- 
> --
>>
>Michael Baumann   >>
>
>
>