Re: Mysterious result....
> The only potential explanation I could come up with is that due to the
> increase in coupling, the back EMF pulse (as the secondary waveform
> collapses) is sufficient to bridge the extra gaps and keep the gap system
> fireing when it otherwise would not (was not)
Richar Hull writes:
<< The back emf would not be the explaination at all, as the gap must break
down the first time inorder to give you the back emf. >>
Duh!....Thanks for pointing out the obvious error in my thinking.
I have, however, noticed another anomaly in the fireing of my gap that might
explain this. I have noticed that even when the gap doesn't fire normally,
*some* of the gaps appear to have a much reduced spark occurring accross them
and I was wondering wheteher this artifact might supply enough juice to the
tank circuit to start things going with the more closely coupled primary?