Re: E-Tesla6 vs FANTC

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

Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>

Hi Weazle,

It was great to hear some feedback on FANTC, and positive feedback was 
really nice!

E-Tesla6 and FANTC crunch a bit differently. I haven't ran a lot of coils 
in a comparison mode between the two programs, but for my 8.5" coil, they 
are both pretty close. Yes, FANTC will work well with WinTesla, JavaTC, 
JHCTES, or any other program which allows accounting for real world 
variances. FANTC has the benefit of gathering more information about the 
system.

I used FANTC on my coils (of course) and it is amazing how significant 
object capacitance's can be. Example: On my small 4.5" coil, I have a 
toroid, but was finding the value off a few pF. Upon inspection of the 
coil, I realized the center of the coil had a metal disc interior that I 
added sometime back for shielding. Well, I measured and input the disc info 
into FANTC at it's position. The result was fantastic! That few pF of 
deviation was removed, and FANTC proved highly accurate. Just another 
example of a simple object that does make a difference, but it is so nice 
to have the capability to input those objects into the program.

Also, strike ring(s) can also be modeled. Just use the disc input and set 
the inner and outer values to the ring dimensions and position it (ground 
connection of course).

Once the imagination gets going..... there's a lot FANTC can be used for. 
We still can't identify all the "optimum" parameters for each system, but 
we can "now" identify all the major parameter values to a high degree of 
accuracy. That is a milestone achieved for coilers. And yes, it can truly 
benefit ALL Tesla Coil design programs. None of this could have been done 
without Paul Nicholson and others from the TSSP group who have worked very 
hard (and still are) researching the physics of Tesla Coils. And not only 
TSSP, but also the great minds here on TCML. The Tesla Coil is an amazing 
machine harboring a huge library of physics. It may also be the most 
difficult machine to extract information from.

Take care,
Bart


Tesla list wrote:

>Original poster: "J. B. Weazle McCreath by way of Terry Fritz 
><twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <weazle-at-hurontel.on.ca>
>
>
>Hello Coilers,
>
>I had an opportunity this evening to run my coil specs through the
>new program FANTC (it's great!) and came up with a surprising, yet
>satifying result.
>
>I use WinTesla to do the ballpark number crunching for my coil and
>for the topload capacity I've been using the value given to me by
>E-Tesla6.  The resulting tap point on the primary never coincided
>with what WinTesla said it should be, and I've been wondering why.
>
>After running FANTC, I inputed the topload capacity it came up with
>and found that it crunched well with WinTesla and gave me a tapping
>point the same as reality.  I'm rather surprised that the difference
>between the calculated capacity of my topload was so large between
>the two programs, 24 pF. from E-Tesla6 and 17 pF. from FANTC, with
>all of the input parameters to the programs being the same.
>
>I suppose it's just another of those quirks that computers have,
>and overall I'm quite happy with the end results.  After all is
>said and done, it's streamer length that matters most!
>
>73, Weazle, VE3EAR/VE3WZL
>G-1#1214
>
>Listening: 147.030+ and 442.075+
>E-mail:    weazle-at-hurontel.on.ca
>            or ve3ear-at-rac.ca
>Web site:  http://www.hurontel.on.ca/~weazle
>
>