Re: A question from way out on the fringe...

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br>

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "Albert Gruzs by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <gruzs1-at-comcast-dot-net>
> 
> Here's the question~
> What would happen if someone used the output from a 'normal' TC, as a driving
> voltage for a rediculously large 'Super TC'?
> It would have to be a mind-numbingly huge device to overcome arcing
across the
> primary.
> Since the TC output is already at a sufficiently high frequency, a second
> 'tank' circuit wouldn't be necessary. A straight coupling from TC
secondary to
> Super TC primary should suffice. Here's the big problem~ coupling the TC
> secondary to the Super TC primary would definately skew both the TC
secondary's
> inductance and capacitance.
> Any thoughts on how to overcome this problem?

You would have something like this, using lumped models:

   gap   k12             k23
+--o o--+   +-----+-----+    +------+   
|       |   |     |     |    |      |
C1      L1  L2    C2    L2'  L3     C3
|       |   |     |     |    |      |
+-------+   +-----+-----+    +------+

This circuit behaves exactly as a "magnifier", where instead of a direct
connection from the top of L2 to the base of L3 there is a transformer
L2'-L3. I have done an analysis of this configuration, and didn't see
particular problems, or advantages. A set of design formulas can be 
derived from the design formulas for a magnifier:
http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acmq/tesla/magnifier.html
I can post the formulas for this configuration, if there is interest.
C2 can be omitted, and then the circuit is equivalent to a regular Tesla
coil with a different link between primary and secondary, but then 
parasitic capacitances at the connection can't be absorbed.

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz