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

Re: [TCML] Would a Tesla coil work in a vaccum?



Brian Hall wrote:



But if air is not necessary for the coupling to work, if no physical
medium is required to transmit the electromagnetic energy - as the
absence of air between the coils, from what I gather, would not
interfere with the  production of resonant rise, then should we
really keep classifying it as an 'air core' transformer then?
Granted, it is very rare that one hears of a tesla coil being built
in anything other than 1 atm, but I cant help but think that this  is
circumstantial.



As you surmise, the term "air core" inductor arises in the context of differentiation from "iron core" inductors. One could also refer to it as a "coreless" inductor.





I know it may have been called an 'air core resonant transformer' for
a very long time, and old habits die hard, but if having air present
between the primary and secondary is not a _requirement_ for it to
work - then perhaps the 'air core' part of what we call it should be
omitted - or otherwise reflect the nature of what is always true
about the coupling and transfer of energy from one coil to the other
- whether in oil, air, or vaccum, just so long as the fluid between
the pri. and sec. it is a non-conductive material?



It's a term that has been around for centuries, and isn't likely to go away soon.

Sort of like how a "transformer" might better be described as "coupled inductors".
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla