Re: Variation of secondary Q

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

Original poster: "Ed Phillips by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net>

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>
> 
> Hi Terry,
>            Any reason why you can't use the E-field to measure Q?
> After all, its differences/time you are after, not an absolute figure.
> 
> Regards,
> malcolm

	I would think that would be the only way you could at least estimate
the Q during a discharge.  The probe would have to be in a place where
the pickup wouldn't be modified by the proximity of streamers.  Since
the Q during discharge varies as the streamers form and move around,
just taking a look at the voltage as it decays and estimating the
decrement (measure decay of as many cycles as possible to improve
accuracy) would work just fine.  I've done that here in the past (for
quite a small coil), but don't have any record of the results or any
pictures of the scope trace.  

Ed