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

Re: [TCML] Quench time

Yes, that is true. But the losses are comparative. From an efficiency standpoint, it is less efficient to transfer energy over a greater number of cycles (if looking only at the transfer losses). But how the transfer results in losses elsewhere in the system is where we must compare overall losses. The typical coil cannot take advantage of higher frequencies in the range Chris is looking at, but Chris's coil can. By reducing the secondary losses with high conductance and few turns, the gap losses (which are thermally huge) are the real threat (just like our coils).
All coils use energy over time to do what they do. Typically, we use many turns in the secondary and di/dt to achieve the energy storage and breakout voltage, but higher frequency can be very lossy. Chris's coil can actually take advantage of a higher frequency to promote a large di/dt without the need for a high turn coil. We normally consider secondary losses as insignificant. Their only insignificant in the fact that secondary losses are compared to gap losses, transformer losses, etc.
It may prove that this is "not" a good method for spark production (if that is where Chris is eventually going with this coil), but Chris is simply experimenting with an idea. Very refreshing I think. 

Take care,
Bart


For a given power level, as the number of transfers of energy per unit
time increases the energy of each transfer must decrease. Otherwise we
would get free energy;  a direct violation of the second law of
thermodynamics.

Jared Dwarshuis

_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla