Re: Non ballasting a pig?

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "harvey norris by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <harvich-at-yahoo-dot-com>


--- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
> Original poster: "Jason Johnson by way of Terry
> Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> <hvjjohnson13-at-hotmail-dot-com>
> 
> I have to disagree. I think that this is a very
> common myth among tesla
> coilers, that you HAVE to have a ballast with a pig.
> Anyway the point I'm trying to get to is that I
> beleive that with a
> properly designed spark gap (I use a rotary, when I
> used an airblast gap
> the MOTs would eat fuses and breakers) a ballast
> shouldn't have to be a
> necessity in almost any system. 

I think you hit the nail on the head here, with a
rotary arc gap, the cap MUST discharge on the zero
crossing point with reference to the AC input voltage.
 This implies that the system can only "see" the short
made by the gap when it is safe for that event to
occur. If we are using an ordinary gap the problems
others are refering to are most obviously true, or
they at least present that possibility. However I
cannot speak from experience on this matter, I only
can agree with what you are saying. However I also
agree that it sounds fairly dangerous, and surely a
gradual power up with some kind of variac in such a
system would be common sense. Obviously if it aint
trippin anything at the lower voltage levels, there
must be some grain of salt to what you are saying,
because the short should be something that would
immediately draw immense amperage, no matter what the
voltage is when the gap begins to fire. Just my
opinion...., but I would STILL use ballasting if
running a pole pig tesla coil from the wall voltage,
it just so much simpler to be safe rather then be
sorry... 

In other matters someone had posted about using both
capacitive AND inductive measures for ballasting. This
is exactly the approach I used in running a neon
output from a pole pig by 480 hz alternator inputs,
and when no ballasting was done in trying this, it
immediately blew out the amperage fuse on the amperage
meter measuring the primary amps. Because the
frequency from the alternator itself is fairly high,
it becomes easy to make a source frequency resonant
circuit that will limit the current in a very special
way. This recent post describing that work done some
time ago is at "Neon Resonant Current Ballasting
Revisted"
http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/teslafy/message/495
This is a must read for anyone not understanding
source frequency resonant circuits where I show how in
the open position the circuit provides the resonant
rise of voltage, and in the closed position it
provides the resonant rise of amperage.(from
alternator inputs) This post also shows the effect of
placing the pole pig primary on the circuit,scopings
of phase differences, what happens when we short the
secondary output, ( can you do THAT with ordinary
ballasting!), and finally a comparison of equal volume
of illuminations between that method and an ordinary
NST at 60 hz. With this method when you short out the
secondary, instead of more demand being made from the
source, you get LESS demand,  Can anyone believe that
one?

Sincerely HDN



=====
Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/teslafy/