Re: coupling coefficient

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

Original poster: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br>

Tesla list wrote:
 >
 > Original poster: "Christoph Bohr by way of Terry Fritz 
<teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <cb-at-luebke-lands.de>
 >
 > Hi Antonio, all...
 >
 > Thank you for your advice. I didn't experience any arcing problems or racing
 > sparcs.
 > I think I forgot to mention I am running a magnifier setup. What I feared
 > was that the higher energy might increase problems with my SRSG to quench
 > propperly.

This is certainly true.

 > Is my assumption right, that the higher power with bigger bansize might
 > drive energy back into the SG ark and avoid a 1st notch quenching and by
 > that dramaticaly increasing stress on the cap?

Higher power will heat the gap more, and certainly turn more difficult
the quenching. Thinking about this, I wonder if the high speed or
multiple gaps reported in use with magnifiers serve just to keep the
gaps cool and produce easy quenching. No big stresses in the cap, but
yes in the gap.

 > If this is not a problem I think I could increase coupling even more after
 > insulating the master oscillator coil ( now it's only "air-insulated" ) ant
 > turning from am reversed cone shape to a helical primary, now that I know
 > the number of turns needed ( 6 )
 > I will give that a try as soon as I find the time.

I don't believe much in solid insulation, unless it is really totally
solid. Any voids with air result in ionization and heavy losses.
If you change the shape of the primary coil, the required number of
turns change.

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz