Re: Better Gap Worth Effort

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Better Gap Worth Effort
• From: "unicorn" <unicorn-at-telerama-dot-com> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
• Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 07:27:04 -0600
• Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
• Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

HELLO,

  I think static gaps are crape.  Tah take to long to cleen and it do not
quench to good. A rsq or a air blast gap works much better then a static
gap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  kid-kv

 P.S I made a air gap with a fan and brass serws and it works much better then
the static gap i had. The static gap took to long to cleen. My coil has
bottle caps and a air gap. With the fan i get 12" eze with out the fan i get
4" to 7" sparks. does that give the id.?



 


> 
>> That brings me to the
>>  following question: does anybody on this list knows the shortest quench 
> time
>>  achieved with static gaps?
>>  
>>  Ruud.
> 
> Ruud,
> 
> Terry, and others (myself included) have achieved first notch quench
> using multiple static gaps, but it doesn't help the spark output.  
> Instead it's better to use fewer gaps, and let the quench-time be
> as it may.  This is because low gap losses are more important than
> a fast quenching in general.  Of course the quench must be good enough
> so you don't get power arcs.
> 
> Cheers,
> John Freau
> 
> 
Regards

• Prev: HV diodes
• Next: Re: Microwave Oven Transformers (MOTs)
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread