Re: Air Blast?
Re: Air Blast?
Wed, 19 Mar 1997 14:42:44 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 97-03-19 04:52:39 EST, you write:
<< I am still designing my new rotary gap. I am going to have several
> electrodes about each side. I will be hooking it up with the equivalent
> of 18 gaps with each 1/18 revolution (18 electrodes on wheel, in 9
> heatsinked pairs, 5 on one side 4 on the other).
> I have only attempted 1 other rotary before and thought I would ask for
> comments before I finish building it.
> Is that to many gaps to have?
> (I thought I could tap down)(I could fit up to 8 pairs on each side)
> Would placing a small air outlet (eyeglass dropper) near each gap that
> is connected through an air valve to a mammoth air compressor (60lbs be
> to much, to little? can go up to 110, but have valves and meters for
> 60), be of significant help in quenching, or is there a thing about too
I tried a similar method using a set of small nozzles at each of six
electrode pairs on a rotary gap. I applied up to 70 PSI air pressure,
provided no benefit at all (observed both by eye, and by o-scope). The
was a small test set-up using only a few watts of power. I think the
gap just laughed at the air blast. But I'm thinking now that whether
the air helps may depend to a degree on how good the quenching was to
with. My quenching was good, but I wanted even better. If quench is
maybe air would help, but I'm doubtful. The key to success, (if success
possible) may be CFM in addition to pressure. My CFM was limited to
I suspect that a rather large sized nozzle may be helpful, for instance
in dia. This way the whole area of the gap is bathed in air, but CFM
requirements will be high -- you'll need the mammoth air compressor.
always wanted to try some sort of gas environment (such as nitrogen),
Towards optimal quenching,