Re: Better Gap Worth Effort

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Better Gap Worth Effort
From: "Malcolm Watts" <malcolm.watts-at-wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 17:16:31 -0600
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

Hi Ruud,
               I wonder if you'll like my answer :

> Original Poster: "Ruud de Graaf" <rdegraaf-at-daxis.nl> 
<snip>
> Just by reading the Tesla mail for a couple of months convinced me also that
> the cap was the part of the TC with the greatest losses and therefore the
> first part to be improved. I'am planning to let my 'Catweazle 1' (ever seen
> the TV sequence?) grow from unblowed stat cap through vacuum blowed through
> supersonic blowed to very, very special cap (<10 usec is my goal). Details
> will be reported at time (now busy with the garden). That brings me to the
> following question: does anybody on this list knows the shortest quench time
> achieved with static gaps?

How about less than 8 uS? It may well have been less still. The 
system oscillated at 800kHz and had k around 0.15. That was about 
how long it took for the secondary of a small coil to ring up and for it 
to lose its energy in an attached discharge. It wasn't a blown gap 
either. No exotic materials, nothing fancy - just a single 1/4" 
tungsten carbide tipped gap. I have a scope photo to prove it too.  
The gap ions probably hung around somewhat longer but there was 
nothing left for them to do.

Regards,
Malcolm