[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE: A Better Spark....

Subject: 
        RE: A Better Spark....
  Date: 
        Thu, 10 Apr 1997 19:36:57 -1100
  From: 
        Ken Smith <ksmith-at-ihug.co.nz>
    To: 
        Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>


At 22:17 09/04/97 -0500, you wrote:

Hi All,
        Some time ago ago wrote about using a partial vacuum  to
ventilate /
cool a Quick Gap , using small pipes  to ventilate the inter (copper)
pipe
spaces. While this has been very successful in my personal setup, I have
this evening, tried an experiment that proves its' worth.

I set up my Mk VII coil again with the original spark gap (RQ) and tuned
to
best - 28 inches to earth.  And in a fit of change I decided to modify
the
spark gap cooling.  In Our local Warehouse we have a brand of cheapo
auto
type vacuum cleaners.  They use a partial vacuum type head on a 1ft or
so
plastic drum collector.  Removing all but the vacuum head I had a good,
powerfull top for the spark gap. A rerun with that showed no improvement
over the standard blower - no surprises.  But in keeping with my ideas
on
the previous vacuum gaps - that have worked very well. I thought I would
try
a simpler system.  I plugged the bottom of the 6" pipe that houses the
gaps
with  a wooden former and drilled 5/16" holes in same corresponding to
the
gaps themselves.  The plug was then sealed into place using hot glue and
the
run retried.  WOW.

Forget the pipes and stuff - KISS.  The holes a half inch below the
copper
pipe gaps were enough to keep the mass flow very much the same, but the
coil
improvement was massive.  I then had to spend 2 hours rerouting the
primary
feed below the baseboard since it kept arcing to the outer turns of the
primary.  When I at last got all the random sparks (and there were many
others - from various points) out of the system I ended up with a
firework
display. Sparks everywhere - off of all points of the torroid and the
coil.
Some basic retuning got me a situation where I was not burning the
secondary, but I have still not got the baby tuned again. Even in this
state
I have gone to 40" plus on a single streamer, but they are so multiple I
feel I can do MUCH better on a single.  

So I was wrong in hoping that a non turbulent flow would give a gross
improvement.  My original vacuum / pipe head does give an improvement to
the
original RQ gap, but the turbulent (quicky) does much, much better.  

Hope this gives some ideas ...


Ken