Re: [TCML] High Power Static Gaps

[<shobley@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I have to say that I'm impressed with the pressurized gaps. We built one
last night and tested it on our coil and got the some of the best
performance yet. Pete put this together in record time, and I was really
impressed with the simplicity of his design.

Here's a movie clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6iVnSxqGJ8

Has anyone experimented with restricting the exhaust to give higher
pressure in the gap chamber?

Steve


On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:46:48 -0700, bartb <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Gary,
> 
> Interesting test. I think the vortex gap has two causes for the higher
> bang energy. 1) higher pressure and 2) the radius put on the electrodes
> of the vortex (assuming the vacuum gap still had the sharper edges).
> Although the gaps are rather close (.031 and .034), the vortex likey had
> a significantly higher breakdown voltage and thus higher energy dump.
> The gaps are pretty close in distance, so I'm not sure where to
> contribute the gain. The biggest difference I can visualize is bang
> voltage, and this appears to be the reason for the lower losses.
> 
> It's difficult for me to compare these two types without ensuring the
> breakdown is as close to equal as possible so that the bang energy is
> relatively constant between the two (current in the arc and arc length).
> 
> What you state does make sense (I'm just not sure this particular test
> shows it) and I suspect if the vacuum gap was set to breakdown at the
> same value as the vortex gap, the arc length would be the defining loss
> factor. So yes, that would be a significant improvement.
> 
> Regards,
> Bart
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla