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

0.5*C*V*V vaild? (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Length)


----------
From:  John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
Sent:  Saturday, February 07, 1998 6:58 PM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: 0.5*C*V*V vaild?  (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Length)


  Mark -

  Are you saying that with your measurements the secondary voltage increased
when you reduced the Cs with no other changes? What percent increase did you
find when the toroid was eliminated?  

  When the breaks are increased do you believe the sec voltage will be
increased with no increase in the input energy?

  The results of your measurements appear to be inportant contradictions to
what other coilers have found.

  John Couture

-----------------------------------------

At 01:53 AM 2/7/98 -0600, you wrote:
>
>----------
>From:  Mark S. Rzeszotarski, Ph.D. [SMTP:msr7-at-po.cwru.edu]
>Sent:  Friday, February 06, 1998 1:23 AM
>To:  Tesla List
>Subject:  Re: Is 0.5*C*V*V vaild?  (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Length)
>
>Hello All,
>        I have stayed out of this voltage/length discussion until now, but
>have really enjoyed the dialogue!
with a Csec of perhaps 10-20 times this or more.

---------------------------------------  Big snip

>4.  The Corum brothers suggest that the voltage rise in a helical resonator
>can be rather astronomical.  I disagree.  My measurements of the maximum
>possible voltage at the toroid tend to agree with the equation:
>Vsec(max) = Vpri x SQRT(Cpri/Csec), or the equivalent:
>Vsec(max) = Vpri x SQRT(Lsec/Lpri), which is essentially the lumped circuit
>model.
>
---------------------------------------------  Big snip

>        I feel that any quantitation of voltage/length for a tesla coil
>should include specification of the number of breaks per second as well as
>the resonant frequency, since these factors also play an important role in
>determining what happens.  If you really need an equation, I suggest 8400
>volts/inch for a tesla coil.  Anything higher than this is speculative at best.
>Regards,
>Mark S. Rzeszotarski, Ph.D.
>
>
>