RE: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)

["Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>]

Richard Quick did NOT invent or post anything about hyperbaric gaps.  He did publish drawings and how-to texts about cylinder (TCBOR) and air-blast gaps.  

If getting close to first-notch quenching is the goal, then a multi-segment cylinder gap is what you want.  If minimizing gap losses is the goal, then a single-segment gap is what you want.  I believe that achieving first-notch quench and minimizing gap losses are mutually exclusive goals.

Jim, have you actually seen (i.e. scoped) first notch operation with a single segment gap?

Regards, Gary Lau
MA, USA

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Jim Mora
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:45 PM
> To: 'Tesla Coil Mailing List'
> Subject: RE: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)
> 
> Hi Dennis,
> 
> Please stand corrected on the Gap construction. The multi-segment called a
> Richard Quick design is a misnomer as it was invented by Richard Hull's
> Group. Richard Quick did invent a single Hyperbaric gap which I have used
> with great success with (2)15/60 neon transformers. Its way down in the
> achieves and has gifs.
> 
> I have never been able to make a decent multi segment copper pipe gap with
> several, sincere attemps. A single hyperbaric gap the air is adjusted to
> quench the gap as near as possible to first transfer of energy into the
> secondary rather than allowing sloshing back and forth which is a big loss
> factor as in a poorly quenched multigap. I just disassembled my multigap for
> the brass screws and noticed the gross arced out gap surfaces. Heat, light,
> misalignment all add to energy loss. A single gap is easy to make, to clean,
> and adjust. Your mileage may vary. It rocked for me!
> 
> Jim Mora
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf
> Of otmaskin5@xxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 5:53 PM
> To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)
> 
> 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
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla