[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: double wound secondary (fwd)

To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: double wound secondary (fwd)
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:17:10 -0600 (MDT)
Delivered-to: testla@xxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Old-return-path: <mod1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:17:11 -0600 (MDT)
Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Resent-message-id: <k-wuCa_xGeP.A.cXC.XGnBHB@chip1>
Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:47 -0700
From: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: double wound secondary (fwd)

2 layer coils.  If in parallel (as in Tesla service) then no effective 
change in inductance just half the resistance. If connected in series then 4 
times the inductance but useless for Tesla coil work as the end of one coil 
will be adjacent to the start of the next but with 50% of the voltage across 
it.
Does anyone really disgree with this?
Peter"

	Certainly not around this house!!!!!  

	The reference to voltage between turns should be emphasized - no one would want a coil built this way.  Problems enough with breakdown between adjacent or "crossed over" turns.....................

Ed

Prev by Date: Re: More Wireless Power Transmission (fwd)
Next by Date: Re: dual mot tc (fwd)
Previous by thread: Re: double wound secondary (fwd)
Next by thread: RE: double wound secondary (fwd)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread