[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [TCML] 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design
I must add my voice to those who don't understand what it is you are building and demonstrating. I've been toying with Tesla coils for maybe 15 years now but I'm having a very difficult time connecting the things you're describing to anything resembling a Tesla coil.
Do your devices make sparks? High voltage? Do they have a spark gap?
Is it like conventional coils where there is a low-turns primary and a high turns secondary?
Do your coils purport to demonstrate some previously unrecognized electrical property or behavior?
I think a schematic diagram would be extremely useful and save you a lot of typing in getting your point across.
Regards, Gary Lau
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Harvey Norris
> Sent: Monday, May 25, 2009 4:00 PM
> To: Tesla Coil Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [TCML] 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design
> --- On Sat, 5/23/09, Dr.Hankenstein <dr.hankenstein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: Dr.Hankenstein <dr.hankenstein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: RE: [TCML] 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design
> > To: "'Tesla Coil Mailing List'" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Saturday, May 23, 2009, 5:46 PM
> > Pardon me for asking, but what in the
> > world are you talking about?
> I am talking about adapting a 60 hz series resonant system to that of a TC primary
> arc gap. I have already built and found the secondary parameters for a 250,000 hz
> NST functioning tesla coil. This uses 12 primary turns and 20 nf.
> The first 60 hz resonant systems using a pair of 12 lb 23 gauge coils @ 140 ohms
> resistance, 1000 ohms inductive reactance used 3uf per side, a very high C value
> when trying to incorporate A TC design, and a blown 440 transformer resulted
> when the arc gap accidently went open. Now the same thing is done using 70 lb
> coils of 23 gauge wire; 840 ohms @ ~18,000 ohms inductive reactance @ 60 hz.
> Here are some former flicker postings on the 12 lb 60 hz binary resonant pair:
> which is simply two inversely made series resonances whose configurations can be
> changed to tuned primary and secondary.
> I wound 140 ohms/ 23 gauge wire onto 3 inch ID smaller spools and arrived at
> 1000 ohms reactance(~ 2.4 H) @ 60 hz. Using a variac to keep the input below 120
> volts to avoid overheating the wire, a pair of these can be inversely series
> resonated using 3 uf for each side, where the tuning for the pair is made according
> to the circumstances of their reactive amperage consumptions; which in turn means
> they can be tuned for magnetic opposition or agreement between the pair. This
> procedure can produce a Q of an 11.5 fold voltage rise between a closely spaced
> pair of the 12 lb coils. Next the input wires to one side are removed after the circuit
> was tuned for a 1 inch separation. The former input wires are shorted to make for a
> secondary air core transformer @ 60 hz,(not a high frequency tesla coil. A smaller
> bathroom night light is given as that secondaries load. Both of these systems in
> simultaneous operation are pictured at both 60 volts and 90 volts input, which is the
> 1000 volt limit for this volume of wire.
> 1000 ohm 60 hz reactance coils,23 gauge/140 ohms DC resistance/ 60 volt input
> TOP; Inversely series resonated pair showing 693 volts between them
> BOTTOM; Rt coil reconfigured as air core secondary with nite-lite bulb as load
> showing 79 volts/ 26 ma vs 60 volt input with left lite at 60 volts input showing that
> more power can be transferred thru the air then if the same load were directly wire
> connected to its source.
> 90 Volt input to 60 hz resonances, top pair produces 1000 volts between them.
> Bottom air core secondary has input of .49A from primary,@ 435 volts resonant
> voltage rise producing 135 volts secondary volts with bulb taking 35.7 ma from
> coil/cap circulation of 143.1 ma. Paradoxically the meter showing the relative
> differences between the 435 volts and 135 volts on secondary reads 0 volts.
> Apparently Isolated voltage rises cannot be compared without making the
> autotransformer connection.
> > best I can figure is that this new system is impractical to
> > build due to
> > the large value inductors and capacitors required.
> Definitely so, but with the larger 70 lb coils in series with two 12 lb coils, values of
> 150 nf can be used with the pair. In the previous pics of the 12 lb coils, I did not
> show the resonant rise of amperage factor, but this will be shown with the larger
> coils in flicker postings later. It is noted that the large inductors are in series with
> each 150 nf value, employing opposite polarity series resonant rises of voltage to
> charge the capacities until the point of short by arc gap.
> Upon short experienced with arc gap, the impedance of the entire circuit seen by
> the supply increases by Q squared, and this is the first thing to be measured; the
> acting resonant rise of amperage Q factor using all the C and L values in parallel
> which shows 6 times more amperage in circulation between L and C then is inputed
> by the source.
> Now to match for the existing design using 20 nf, when the arc gap fires the 150
> nf capacities appear in series for 75 nf, almost four times the previous 20 nf value.
> As previously noted the similarity to the Marx gap is that two capacities are charged
> in parallel and discharge in series at the arc gap midpoint. It should merely then be
> necessary to tap the former 12 turn primary to also obtain almost 4 times less
> primary inductance.
> > Obviously input VA
> > would play a factor in choosing the appropriate values of L
> > & C;
> > correct?
> Since stupendous L values exist for the purpose of both raising the input voltage
> available at arc gap; and quenching the arc once the arc is initiated, it does seem
> rather silly to suppose that by merely allowing a couple of primary turns placed in
> series with an arc gap matched where the TC secondary resonance is known;
> might produce results. If it does this then would allow for speculative primary
> designs where primary
> mutual inductance with the large exterior L values might be put into play.
> Do you have any photographs of your coil?
> I will soon work on showing flicker jpegs showing the both series and parallel acting
> Q factors for the newer 94 lb system. It is balanced very well but when employed
> for voltage rise a mis-balance is noted. This will take several jpegs and days; busy
> with spring planting right now.
> Sincerely HDN
> Tesla mailing list
Tesla mailing list