[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: New pictures [ Mag vs Conv.]
From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com[SMTP:FutureT-at-aol-dot-com]
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 1997 3:44 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: New pictures
> John, how would you compare them? The resonator coil on my magnifier
> is only 8 inches by 24 inches. I can't build a conventional coil
> with a secondary this size that produces 11 to 15 foot sparks. And
> if you start trying to compare input power versus spark length, then
> you get back into the dog-chasing-its-tail arguments that you and
> others on this list have been debating back and forth for the past
> week.
> Big magnifiers can produce big sparks. Small magnifiers don't appear
> to be any better than a conventional coil of the approximate same
> size. Richard Hull's 11-E maggie with the tiny 4 inch by 12 inch
> resonator (30 gauge wire) always astounds everyone with its 10 and 11
> foot sparks. How do you compare that coil against any conventional
> coil? No one has ever produced 10+ foot sparks with a conventional
> coil this size, not even the Good Doctor himself.
Bert, All,
I think the size of the driver should be included when discussing the
size of a magnifier coil, after all a conventional coil doesn't need a
driver. It doesn't seem "fair" to consider only the resonator and
ignore the size of the driver. When the driver and resonator together
are considered, it may be as large or larger than a corresponding
conventional TC secondary.
>Frankly, I don't
> think there will ever be a "best" way to compare conventional
> coils versus magnifiers - the engineering design of the drivers is
> totally different, the operation of the resonant coil is very
> different, and even the character of the sparks, in my opinion, is
> different. Apples and tangerines.
I don't see anything wrong with using power vs. spark length as a
method for comparing magnifier vs. classic TCs. In the lower
powered work I've done, I didn't see any difference in the spark
character, etc. I suspect that the operation of magnifiers and classic
TCs are more alike than different.
> Stepping back from magnifiers for a short while, Bill Emery and I are
> winding the largest conventional coil we've ever attempted. It is
> 18.5 inches in diameter and 55.50 inches in length and is wound with
> 14 gauge wire. The complete coil and form will weigh over 300
> pounds. We will run this as a conventional coil, not a magnifier.
> We expect minimum 15 foot sparks, and maybe some as long as 18 feet.
> The toroid will have a cross section of 20 inches and will be 8 feet
>snip> Hopefully, we'll gain enough experience from building the
> 18.5 inch coil which will allow us to successfully build and operate
> this 28.5 inch monster. This coil should perform about the same as
> Greg Leyh's excellent coil. We will not, however, run this coil on
> d.c. as Greg has done.
Exciting plans you and Bill have, and nice work on the magnifier!
John Freau
> Bert Pool
> TCBFW
> bertpool-at-flash-dot-net
>>