Re: Bipolar or half wave.

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Bipolar or half wave.
From: "Malcolm Watts" <malcolm.watts-at-wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 16:32:43 -0700
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

HI Luc,

> Original Poster: "Luc" <ludev-at-videotron.ca> 

<snip> 

> Tx for your attention ,you suggest using a passive resonator as counter
> poise for a quarter wave resonator ? I imagine you need to use the same
> inductace,same self capacitance and same top laud but  out of the field of
> the primary .Do you know if it's an advantage in regard of a half wave or a
> bipolar resonator.

It is an advantage in some respects (the resonators can be quite big 
without being overly long and can be mounted vertically like the 1/4 
wave system. Ideally the resonators are identical but there is a 
"However" to be aware of: because only one of the resonators is 
driven there is an impedance imbalance between them that can 
cause pri-sec flashovers for the driven resonator under some 
conditions (e.g. top loadings could be made different to reduce the 
imbalance). I would rate the scheme fine for a small coil but might 
be a problem for a powerful system. Pri-sec flashovers don't bother 
me in small systems. I've yet to see one kill a transformer if the 
transformer is electrically close to the main gap.
     Perhaps the real "ideal" to make this scheme happen well is to 
have a magnifier type driver built so it is balanced to earth with 
opposite secondary ends feeding each resonator. That avoids the 
resonator imbalance but problems might still arise if the output of 
one of the resonators touches ground and the other doesn't. I've 
used the scheme in a small coil but haven't bothered to pursue it 
further.  The English is fine by me :)

Regards,
Malcolm