Re: Using SF6 for cap..

Tesla List wrote:
> >From MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nzTue Jul  9 21:56:34 1996
> Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 08:08:35 +1200
> From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Using SF6 for cap..
> Hi Kristian, all,
> > - no danger of oil burning/exploding around
> > - no air-bubbles possible, will replace air everywhere especially
> >   when a vacuum is pumped first
> > - SF6 can be replaced every once and a while if necessary
> > - is not messy/heavy like oil, is heavier than air
> > - if cap fails it's easy to fix as there's no oil to mess the setup
> > etc..
> >
> > Any ideas? Comments? (I know SF6 is toxic)
> I've read that discharges and SF6 don't mix well. The SF6 can becomne
> dissociated into some nasty chemicals. I think freon would be a
> better choice unless there is no possibility of a discharge
> occurrring in the gas. Greg Leyh had something to say about this in
> his TCBA article.
> Malcolm

Malcolm, all,

You and Greg Leyh are correct.  The stuff turns into fluorine and sulfur 
under continuous arc conditions.  Thus, it can't be used to quench a 
spark gap which is supposed to spark continuously.  (Too bad! It really 
does this job incredibly well) 

 However, Kristian has  offered it up for its ideal use!!!  To suppress 
unwanted corona and arcing!  This is its reason for being!  In a well 
designed SF6 system there will never ever be a hint of corona.  Thus, no 
danger of breakdown.

An occasional arc is Ok ,too.

Richard Hull, TCBOR