Thanks for all your advice Antonio.
In that case I think I will stick with conventional 2 coil systems.
Although the idea of leaving the cumbersome driver set up in the garage
permanently and just being able to erect the extra coil outside quickly
when needed is tempting... Much easier than moving a big two coil system!
On Thu., 9 Aug. 2018, 1:17 am Antonio Queiroz, <acmdequeiroz@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Em 07/08/2018 06:20, Gregory Peters escreveu:
>
> Thanks Antonio,
> I've been reading your papers and it's quite an interesting concept.
> Having to match the parts so carefully certainly would be a challenge
> and does put me off the project a bit. In the unoptimised version,
> does the tighter primary:secondary coupling offer any performance
> increase over a regular two coil system? My simulations don't suggest
> it does, but it seems it should given that magnifiers are routinely
> run with K > 0.5.
> I have a few other questions I may contact you off-list about.
> Many thanks!
> Greg.
>
> The tighter coupling is just a consequence of the small part of the
> secondary-tertiary system that is coupled to the primary. From one of the
> formulas in http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acmq/tesla/magnifier.html, if the
> secondary coil of the conventional Tesla coil
> is split in two coils with inductances L2 and L3, and k123 and k12 are the
> coupling coefficients for the conventional coil and for the magnifier
> driver respectively, the system has the same behavior if k123 =
> k12(L2/(L2+L3))^(1/2). For example, if the original secondary coil
> inductance
> is split in a 8:1 ratio, k12=3*k123. Of course this assumes negligible
> capacitance across L2.
>
> Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla