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

Re: Re. QUENCH TIMES



tesla-at-pupman-dot-com on 06.01.99 11:16:06

To:   tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
cc:    (bcc: Marco Denicolai/MARTIS)
Subject:  Re. QUENCH TIMES




Original Poster: Gary Lau  05-Jan-1999 2005 <lau-at-hdecad.ENET.dec-dot-com>

>One thing often done to reduce an RSG's effective dwell time is arranging
>stationary and rotating electrodes in pairs that are wired in series and
>only come into alignment 2X or 4X or 8X (actually, any integer if you're
>not concerned with sync operation) per revolution, effectively dividing
>the actual dwell time by the number of electrode-pairs.

Thanks for this good idea.

>>I was thinking to use a high resistance voltage divider to have 15 kV on
>>the RSG and 45 kV on the static gap. The static gap would be a series of
>>sections, to easily set its trigger voltage. The voltage divider should
>>also remove a part of the randomness involved in air gap trigger voltage.

>I doubt that putting a resistive divider across the gaps would alter the
>quench time.  When the gaps are conducting, the resistors are effectively
>shorted out.  But then, quenching really involves whether the gap will
>_start_ to conduct following a zero-current-crossing, so I can't say for
>sure.

The voltage divider was intended to reduce the RSG voltage BEFORE it
sparks. That means
that it will delay the TRIGGERING time instant thus reducing the overall
quench time. And
I mean "delay" in respect to the time instant the rotating and stationary
electrodes come
into proximity.