[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)



RQ gaps do work good, but they still can't beat the spark output you will
obtain using a hyperbaric sparkgap.  So far, I have found nothing
that will beat a hyperbaric.

Contact me off-list if you want me to send you the plans.

Dr. Resonance




On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:52 PM, <otmaskin5@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> I've been following earlier discussions about higher losses associated with
> multi-segmented?spark gaps (i.e., Richard Quick type) compared to a?single
> gap.? It's clear that the experience of this group has been power losses are
> significantly less with?a single gap style with adequate airflow.? But I'm
> not sure I caught why that is.? What is the reason that a 0.27" single gap
> loses less power than an 9-gap / 10 pipe RQ gap that has total gap size of
> 0.27"?? If total gap spacing is the same for both, why would one be more
> lossy than the other?
>
> One other question, has anyone experimented with a RQ style using only 2
> parallel pipes for a single gap???If so, what were the results.? With good
> air flow, it seems this set up?would be good for keeping the gap cool
> considering airflow goes between, around and through the pipes.? And you
> could make the pipes longer, say 4 to 5?inches for better heat sinking
> ability.?
>
> Sorry to take everyone back to an old topic, but I've been away for a
> while.? Thanks, Dennis Hopkinton MA
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla