[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: coupling coefficient
To All -
Please note that the Tesla Coil Handbook has now been replaced by the
Tesla Coil Construction Guide. This book has everything the Handbook had
plus much more. The coupling test is shown plus other tests relative to
Tesla coils. There are more Tesla coil tests shown in my Tesla Coil Design
Manual. These tests have been selected as the preferred tests for Tesla
coils from the myriad of tests shown in the engineering texts.
I note that many of the TC questions now being asked by newbies on the
List are answered in my books. But why buy a book when you can get the
answers free from the List? My hope is that some coilers will find it more
convienent to have most of their questions answered by buying my three
books. I also show how the results of some of the tests (coupling included)
can be verified with the JHCTES computer program. This is something not
available anywhere else.
John Couture
---------------------------------------
At 05:42 PM 8/31/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Original Poster: "D.C. Cox" <DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net>
>
>to: Dan
>
>It's posted in the archives and also in John Couture's Tesla Coil Handbook.
> You use an alternating current of known freq (60 HZ) thru the inductor of
>measured inductance and measure the current with the sec connected in first
>series, and then reverse connections.
>
>DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net
>
>----------
>> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>> Subject: coupling coefficient
>> Date: Monday, August 31, 1998 11:20 AM
>>
>> Original Poster: Dan Kline <ntesla-at-ntesla.csd.sc.edu>
>>
>> >Original Poster: "D.C. Cox" <DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net>
>> >
>> >to: Jim
>> >
>> >Even with small coils any type of helix usually results in overcoupling.
>
>> >We prefer a flat spiral and then check the coeff. of coupling using
>> >standard techniques.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> All,
>> I *should* know this, but I don't, so...
>> What are the standard techniques for checking the coefficient of
>coupling?
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>>
>>
>
>
>