Re: ignitron tubes
Tesla List wrote:
> >From hb-at-earthlink-dot-netSun Jun 30 09:40:55 1996
> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 23:05:42 -0700
> From: WILLIAM HENDERSON <hb-at-earthlink-dot-net>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: ignitron tubes
> Hi Richard,
> thanks for the input on the ignitron tubes,it sounds as if you have tried them?
> for hi powered t.c.'s what would you recommend, rotary s. gaps emersed in nitrogen g. or sticking
> with finicky quenched gaps, i've tried both and found the rotary's to be more reliable,one of the
> problems i've had is the destruction of the gaps(tungsten & carbon arc)at hi current 75+ amps,it
> would be nice to have a system that you didn't have to rebuild every few hours?at one point i was
> running a mercury "interrupter" in nitrogen gas ,but found that the mercury had a tendency to
> squeeze out under hi rpm(breaks).I don't recommend anyone using mercury interrupters because of
> the toxicity of the material, unless they use a regimented safety procedure for handling it,
> glovies,face mask,respirator.One word of caution! Once mercury is absorbed into the body it's
> almost impossible to get out,this stuff is deadly so be careful!
> Looking forward to your
> response thanks
For all systems of really high power , I would recommend a rotary gap
with extra static gaps in series. With special efforts, these might be
serviceable up to 50KW of input power. The highest power that I have
ever run was with our large two coil system, "Nemesis" (13KW). My rotary
and 6 static gaps held up well over the 3 year life of the system.
You can try the pressurized nitrogen, but it might be more trouble than
it is worth unless you go over 20,000 watts.
Richard Hull, TCBOR