Re: Arc length vs pwr

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Arc length vs pwr
From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 15:17:37 -0700

Tesla List wrote:
> 
> > Subject: Re: Arc length vs pwr
> 
> >From bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-comSat Oct 19 22:22:12 1996
> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 09:57:43 -0700
> From: Bert Hickman <bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-com>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Arc length vs pwr
> 
> Tesla List wrote:
> >Snipola


> >From a practical standpoint:
> For the reason you site, quenching somewhat early does not cause a
> dramatic falloff in secondary output. This is a _different_ result than
> the graph by the Corums in their Vacuum Tesla Coil book.  We don't seem
> to rapidly "fall off the cliff" for shorter-than-ideal quenchtimes. If
> true, this is GOOD news! Precise quenchtimes may not be necessary to get
> good coil performance. You can actually have dwells significantly above
> or below the ideal, and still get excellent (>80% of max) output.
> 
> Safe coilin' to ya, Dave!
> 
> -- Bert --


Absolutley correct Bert!  The quench can be off a bit and still produce 
incredible sparks.  The gap should match the power level and type system 
more than provide some magic quench time.

Richard Hull, TCBOR