Re: Sparks to ground

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Sparks to ground
From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 23:04:33 -0800
Tesla List wrote:
> 
> >From MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nzTue Nov 19 21:54:05 1996
> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 08:18:16 +1200
> From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Sparks to ground
> 
> Hi Richard,
>              Interesting observations....
> 
> > It has been stated on this list that one an arc contacts ground that the
> > resonator Q goes into the hamper to near zip.
> >
> > I was reviewing some frame by frame video hits of maggey #11-E and note
> > that the arc channel develops over an extended period of time!
> >
> > I note a spark approaching the heavily grounded aluminum siding on my
> > house.  The contact occurrs, let us say, at t0, in frame, f0.  The arc
> > channel is fairly dim, but contact is made and the arc channel is 115"
> > long point to point.  In the next frame, f1, (1/30 second later) the
> > channel doubles in brightness.(as measured by my light meter (spot
> > reading).  In frame f2 the arc channel increases in brightness by another
> > 40% or so over the preceeding frame.  In frame f3, the channel retains
> > about the same brilliance (white hot) as in f2 frame.  In frame f4, the
> > channel starts to reduce its brightness and is about 65% of f2s level.
> > Frame f5 shows a greatly reduced channel intensity and is just about 10%
> > below that of f0s level.  In frame f5, The channel is just a faint mist
> > of ionized vapor.  Frame f6, shows the channel to have disappeared.
> >
> > Assuming 400 BPS (which is my normal break rate), This means that the
> > system has energy pops at the rate of about 13 pulses per video frame. so
> > we see that from time of contact to max brighness,(more or less), we
> > actually sent in about 52 energy pulses.  Is the electronic Q of the
> > resonator system this slow to respond?!!  Energy delivery to the arc
> > channel was consistently on the increase over this long period
> > (~120,000 usec).
> >
> > The rise to max channel current is rather slow, compared to the
> > extinguishing of the channel which never takes more than 2 video frames
> > (1/15 sec-60,000usec).
> >
> > I am making no judgments here, only reporting observational fact.
> 
> In response to your question, yes, I think it is. Until the
> ionization is approaching a low resistance the Q does remain pretty
> high. In my experience, Q drops in proportion to the degree of
> ionization and power dissipation. Corona alone doesn't sink very much
> energy at all and I think a weakly ionized channel is not too far
> removed from corona alone. I have scoped several beat envelopes
> occurring during corona production and have a series of photographs
> just taken off the scope (to be posted when developed) that show the
> result of greater and greater loading. Things do seem to happen in
> slow motion. In my experience, establishing a good arc always takes
> time unless the discharge point is close enough for the arc to be
> struck immediately. It might be worth trying that and checking the
> difference.
> 
> Malcolm


Malcolm,

Thanks for the interesting info from the scope.  The arc do have a fairly 
long "play time".  If, as suggested by others, the heavy arc breaks when 
the primary tank is emptied, then why should a similar arc immediatley 
break out else where on the coil?  I hope to investigate the DC part of 
this phenomenon soon, which might play a real role in this quniching 
business.

Richard Hull, TCBOR