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

Re: Fw: Arc Impedance Study - Computer Models



Hi John,

> Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com 
> 
> In a message dated 98-10-13 01:43:50 EDT, you write:
> 
> << >        I run a large cap small Lp coil on quite modest primary 
>  > voltages with a single static and get sterling performance with no 
>  > gap cooling, airflow etc. However, running with a small cap and the 
>  > same leakage-L limited transformer, the same gap does not do the job 
>  > and requires the extras to perform. Anyone else found this? Resonant 
>  > charging systems in particular seem to perform well with the simpler 
>  > gaps.
>  > 
>  > Observations invited,
>  > Malcolm
>  >  >>
> 
> Malcolm, all,
> 
> This is very interesting.  One would think that the smaller cap would
> allow for easier quenching, unless the faster firing repetition is keeping
> the gaps too hot (?)  Using resonant charging, the gap firing will occur
> when the mains are at a low voltage, this may help prevent some sort
> of power arcing conditions?  But then again, quench doesn't matter
> much.  I think I've seen the same effects you
> noted, but my experiments weren't well controlled.  I suspect that 
> when the cap is too small, it does a poor job of exciting the TC, it's
> like trying to break a rock by striking it with a toothpick, instead of
> a sledgehammer.  Does this seem reasonable in any way?
> 
> John Freau 

Just wondering how much of a part the "stiffness" of the charging 
source has to play when used with caps of different sizes. It does 
appear to have some influence. The suggestion is that for a given 
charging source impedance, the gap is harder to put out if a small 
primary cap is used compared with a large one. Anyone else found this?

Cheers,
Malcolm