[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
RE: Results of new single static gap
From: "Thornton, Russ #CSR2000" <ThorntoR-at-rc.pafb.af.mil>
> Tesla List wrote:
>
> > ----------
> > From: Thornton, Russ #CSR2000 [SMTP:ThorntoR-at-rc.pafb.af.mil]
> > Sent: Monday, August 24, 1998 6:06 AM
> > To: 'Tesla discussion Group'
> > Subject: RE: Results of new single static gap
> >
> > All,
> > This brings up a question that has been rattling around in my head for a
> > while now. Actually two questions.
> >
> > 1) How are the static gap distances arrived at and why do you(generic)
> > divide them up the way you do?
>
> ..........................They are normally arrived at through serendipity
> and
> guesstimate, tempered by the effort needed to create large numbers of well
> aligned static gaps and the realization that the distance between gaps
> will
> become vanishingly small in high numbered systems with attendant fouling
> and
> maintenance nightmares. The proper distances are arrived at totally
> through
> good ole trial and error (rank beginner) or educated and calibrated
> eyeball
> (old
> hand). R. Hull
> ..........................
>
Here is another slant on my question. Has anyone come up with any kind of a
quantitative or qualitative relationship between the difference between(for
example) ten 0.01 gaps and five 0.02 gaps?
Russ Thornton
CSR 2040,
Building 989, Rm. A1-N20
Phone: (407) 494-6430
Email: thorntor-at-rc.pafb.af.mil