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

Re: Corum's new paper, a "naive swindle"?

To Duane, Terry, et. al.

First, after being the recipient of many e-mails for the fact that
Dr. James and Kenneth Corum's article appears on my web site,
please allow me make several statements.  

Number one.  I do indeed have the highest respect for all the work
that both Ken and Jim have put into all their published papers.

Number two.  By placing their article on my web site, it was my
sole intention to give them a forum, from which to have their work
widely read on the Tesla List, (as well as anyone else,) who visits
my web site.  There seems to be a pervasive perception that by
including their paper on my web site, that this also implies that
I (personally) endorse, agree, and subscribe to their conclusions,
results and contentions.  In large part, this is so, but with the
following caveat:  I am not always right in what I believe, and,
by the same, I am not always wrong, when it comes to Tesla Coil
theory.  After all, it IS still "theory," so long as there is 
disagreement in the trenches (so to speak.)

Number three.  The coil the Corum's make reference to in their
article IS NOT my Model 5M (Magnifier type coil,) nor is it
my largest to date Model 13M (Magnifier type coil.)  It IS my
original (prototype) Model 10 (classical two-coil) Tesla Coil!
I first built this model in 1977.  It was sold to Battelle Memorial
Research Institute in 1989.  That coil was subsequently placed
in the High Voltage Research Laboratories of Ohio State University.

Number four.  For all those disagreeing with the Corum's findings 
of their article on my web site, please ask yourselves this:  Did
you (accurately and faithfully) perform their Test # 2?  What were
*YOUR* results????? 

Best regards,
Bill Wysock.

> Date:          Tue, 11 Apr 2000 19:13:48 -0600
> To:            tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject:       Corum's new paper, a "naive swindle"?
> From:          Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>

> Original Poster: gbyrd-at-aros-dot-net 
> 
> Hi all, 
> 
> My name is Duane Bylund, and I am new to this list (as of 4-10-2000). I
> recently ran across a paper by the Corum brothers titled "Class notes:
> Tesla Coils and the Failure of Lumped-Element Circuit Theory". Many of you
> have probably read this, and it has brobably been hashed out on this list.
> I do not know the way people feel about this paper, but, as I "stand on the
> other side of the fence", I would like to put my 2 cents worth in.
> 
> In my opinion, "Class Notes" is a total failure of an attempt to prove
> something true in science that is false. Why do I say this? Because I KNOW
> a Tesla resonator CAN be modeled as a series lumped RLC circuit! Not only
> that, but the best Tesla coil possible would be a simple series lumped RLC
> circuit! I am not a Ph.D., but I have experimented a bit with resonators.
> 
> Many of the points taken in "Class Notes" rely on the fact that a resonator
> has multiple harmonics, or overtones, which a lumped circuit does not. I
> agree with this, but this is very important: Multiple harmonics and
> overtones are not important to the operation of a Tesla coil!! You could
> classify harmonics and overtones as a byproduct, or even something not
> wanted, irrelevant to the operation of the coil. Keep this in mind.
> 
> We all know that a resonator has multiple resonant points, and the best
> mode to operate a coil is at it's 1/4 wave mode. All the other harmonics
> and overtones are useless! We all operate our coils close to the 1/4 wave
> resonant frequency. So here is a challenge: Drive the base of a resonator
> with a signal generator at the 1/4 frequency, and drive a series lumped RLC
> circuit with a signal generator at it's resonant frequency. Hit it with a
> CW source, a damped sine wave, or anything else. Can you show me a
> difference in the current out of the generator, or a difference in the
> voltage across the reactive components? I have not been able to see one.
> Conclusion? A resonator CAN be modeled as a series lumped RLC circuit.
Period!
> 
> The Corum's state that the voltage rise from a Tesla coil is not by
> lumped-element transformer action, nor by induction, nor by simple
> lumped-element coupled resonance. They state the voltage rise is by VSWR. I
> agree with this. But is not VSWR the same as Q in a series lumped circuit?
> Gee, I think it is.
> 
> The Corum's state that "the current entering one end of a tuned
> transmission line resonator is not equal to that exiting at the other end".
> I think we all know this, but is this a good thing??? Take a look at Photo
> #1 in their paper (page 9). You see a graph showing the voltage rise along
> the resonator. Pay particular attention to the 1/4 wave graph, the one
> where we operate our coils. Notice the tangent of the curve, or the "rate
> of change" of voltage along the resonator. At the base of the resonator,
> the current is maximum, and the rate of change is maximum. At the top of
> the resonator, the current is minimum, and the rate of change of voltage is
> zero! Conclusion: We want the current at the top to be large! We want the
> rate of change to be large at the top, as well as the bottom. We want a
> series lumped circuit. Period! We are stuck with a low current at the top
> because of distributed capacitance, the limitations of making a perfect
> resonator.
> 
> Do you believe your own eyes? I got a copy of the Corum's paper on Bill
> Wysocks internet page. Bill, by the way, supports the paper "Class Notes".
> On this page you can see a magnifier coil:
> 
> www.ttr-dot-com/model5m_demo_coil.htm
> 
> If you look at this photo, and if you can't see a series lumped circuit,
> you are blind! What I see is a source of EMF, in series with an inductor,
> in series with a capacitance. You don't even need to measure anything to
> see this.
> 
> Towards the end of "Class Notes", it is written "as voiced by Professor
> King, the current distribution could be uniform enough so that you can
> represent the transmission line as a lumped circuit" (with a large
> capacitance). Is this not what everyone is doing these days to get their
> coils to work better?
> 
> In conclusion, I know that the resonator can be modeled as a series lumped
> circuit, and the best Tesla coil possible would be a simple series lumped
> circuit - a resonator with no distributed capacitance, the capacitance
> being lumped at the top.
> 
> Happy coiling,
> 
> Duane A Bylund
> 
> 
___________________________
Tesla Technology Research