Re: LTR

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: LTR
From: Gary Lau 17-Jun-1999 1930 <lau-at-hdecad.ENET.dec-dot-com> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 03:49:19 -0600
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

>Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com 
>
>Maybe the robustness of a particular NST is having an effect here.
>I had an old 12 - 30 NST that was able to charge a .0085uF cap, and
>give 38" sparks using a static gap.  But a more modern 12 - 30 NST
>gave only about 28" sparks in the same TC.  But when I went to the
>sync gap setup, the newer, weak NST gave 42" sparks.
>
>Maybe 15 - 60 NST's have a wider "charging-window" and can better
>handle LTR caps than the 12 - 30 NST's.  Or your NST may be robust
>in its current capabilities.  This may explain the differing results we've
>gotten, and explain why your results did not match your simulations.
>Maybe the simulations do not account for unexpected robustness in
>an NST.
>
>John Freau

The short circuit current from my NST closely matches that predicted by
the simulation model, as does the steady-state resonant rise for various
capacitor values in parallel with the NST secondary, as documented on my
web page.  If my NST were capable of extraordinary output current, that
would be evident in the short circuit current measurements.  I think to
really get to the bottom of this, plus why my series resistors get so
hot, I'll just have to build one of Terry's fiber-optic VI probes.  I'll
get to that, right after by new RSG, primary, and secondary.......

Regards, Gary Lau
Waltham, MA USA