RE: More Coupling...

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>


All -

There is another coupling test method that can be used to verify the test
mentioned below. The equation is

   K = sqrt(1-(Fo/Fs)^2)

   K = coupling factor
   Ko = Resonant frequency with secondary open
   Ks = Resonant frequency with secondary shorted

The advantage of this test is that the frequencies can be read very
accurately with the proper frequency counter. The test is shown in my Tesla
Coil Construction Guide.

John Couture

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 6:39 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: More Coupling...


Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>

Hi Bart and Paul,

The measurements for my big coil (as it was then) and the coil's details are
at:

http://hot-streamer-dot-com/TeslaCoils/MyPapers/sgap/sgap.html

For those that wish to help, the "best method" of measuring coupling is at:

http://www.pupman-dot-com/listarchives/1997/november/msg00898.html

Cheers,

        Terry



At 05:52 PM 12/21/2000 -0600, you wrote:
>
> Hi Paul and Everyone,
>
> My reply here is to ask (plead) for more coiers to make coupling
> measurements. All that is needed is a DMM capable of volt and amp readings
> (or meters capable of this). Also needed is a primary that can be moved
above
> and below the secondary base line in steps (or the secondary to achieve
the
> same result). Measurement is easy (we can define that later).
>
> If case you haven't kept up with this thread, I have found an increase in
> coupling error to Paul's program "acmi" predictions (error increases in
the
> direction of increased coupling). What I would like to find out with your
> help is:
>
> 1. is current changing during measurement (and not realized),
> 2. is the flat primary shape causing the error,
> 3. if #2 is correct, does acmi need to apply a correction of some type,
> 4. if #3, is this true for only flat primary's?
> 5. Lot's of other little tid bits to increase our coupling knowledge.
>
> So we need some flat, helical, and conical coupling measurements as well.
> This type of comparison has been needed for some time and the information
> will add another little wrinkle in our coiling brains.
>
> Any takers? Anyone?
>
> Thanks,
> Bart
>
> Tesla list wrote:
>>
>> Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>"
>> <paul-at-abelian.demon.co.uk>
>>
>> Barton B. Anderson <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>> The only way to take this further is with more results from other
>> sources. If a systematic error develops, either it can be calibrated
>> out of acmi, or I can do something smarter with the current filaments.
>