Re: 0.5*C*V*V vaild? (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Leng (fwd)

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: 0.5*C*V*V vaild? (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Leng (fwd)
• From: Tesla List <mod1-at-pupman-dot-com>
• Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 22:14:30 -0700 (MST)
• Approved: mod1-at-pupman-dot-com

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 19:03:28 +1200
From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: 0.5*C*V*V vaild?  (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Leng

Hi all,
         Comments and queries:

> From:  D.C. Cox [SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
> Sent:  Tuesday, February 10, 1998 11:12 AM
> To:  Tesla List
> Subject:  Re: 0.5*C*V*V vaild?  (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Leng
> 
> to: Ed
> 
> As I am sure you are aware, measuring static Q is nearly meaningless with
> regard to dynamic operating Q factor.  John Couture's method of measuring
> dynamic Q by measuring the bandwidth factor is the very best way to do it
> --- and the calculations of Vpri x dynamic Q produce a valid output of
> actual Tesla coil potential.  John's method is detailed in his book and is
> must reading for anyone who really wants to know exactly what their coil is
> producing in terms of potential.
> 
> DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net

Of course dynamic Q can vary from unloaded Q to 10 or less with an 
attached streamer. How does one measure static Q? I measure Q unloaded
using a lo-Z (7Ohm) signal generator hooked to the resonator base and 
a scope probe suspended a minimum of three feet away to get the -3dB 
readings.
     To me, this figure is quite meaningful, especially when 
comparing different resonators.

?
Malcolm
<snip>

• Prev: Coax Cap??
• Next: Re: 0.5*C*V*V vaild? (Was Output Voltages and Voltage/Leng (fwd)
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread