RE: conical secondaries (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 10:12:38 -0400
From: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: conical secondaries (fwd)

By what means are you measuring to conclude that "flat spirals handle
higher current" and "solenoids handle a higher potential"?  I think the
only measure of performance differential that I would trust is comparing
spark length using the same power supply and VA consumption.  Do we
agree that spark length a suitable basis for comparison?

Gary Lau
MA, USA

> Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 07:30:57 -0500
> From: David Thomson <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: 'Tesla list' <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: conical secondaries (fwd)
> 
> Hi Matt,
> 
> > The  advantage of a conical coil is that it can contain more
> > power  (current times potential) before breaking out than if
> > a pure flat spiral or  pure solenoid coil were used.
> >
> > Why? I thought that breakout was a function of the top load
geometry.
> 
> I have found that flat spiral coils will handle a higher current than
> solenoids, and that solenoids will handle a higher potential than flat
> spirals.  A cone gives the best of both.  The coil geometry is just as
> important as the top load geometry.
> 
> Dave