Re: RQ Schematics

Subject:   Re: RQ Schematics
  Date:    Mon, 21 Apr 1997 17:08:21 -0400
  From:    "George W. Ensley" <erc-at-coastalnet-dot-com>
    To:    Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>

I use the standard RQ (xfmr - caps - safety  gaps - chokes - static gap)
arrangement on my coil. The safety gap will fire very occasional on one
or the other when a strike from the toroid finds its way past the strike
rail to the primary. I suspect the whole primary tank circuit, chokes,
static gaps, cap and all are pulled off center as referenced to the
tap of the neon and the center point of the safety gaps. In any event
gaps fire the neon is somewhat protected and i feel good.

At 12:20 AM 4/21/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Subject:  Re: RQ Schematics
>  Date:   Sun, 20 Apr 1997 18:19:29 +0500
>  From:   "Alfred A. Skrocki" <alfred.skrocki-at-cybernetworking-dot-com>
>    To:   Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>On Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:50:08 -0400 Thomas McGahee
><tom_mcgahee-at-sigmais-dot-com> wrote;
>>... Oh, what the heck! My own personal favorite is any circuit that 
>> has the main spark gap across the transformer.
>Thomas, this arrangement has always intrigued me when in illustrations 
>of the arrangement with the spark gap across the transformer we see 
>the safety gap also across the transformer. What intrigues me is that 
>the safety gap will never fire! The operating gap will always be 
>smaller than the safety gap otherwise the 'safaty gap' will become 
>the running gap! Consequently in the arrangement with the spark gap 
>across the transformer the safety gap is a waste of time, or one 
>could say there is NO SAFETY in that arrangement.
>> People who put the capacitor directly across the transformer are
>> unnecessarily jeapordizing their neons.
>How!? If you have a safety gap across the transformer and the spark 
>gap is in series with the transformer it will be totally protected  
>UNLIKE the condition of the spark gap and safety gap being 
>across the transformer where the safety gap CAN'T fire! In the 
>arrangement you describe the only function the safety gap would serve 
>would be to protect someone from opening up their gap way too far!
>In the arrangement with the capacitor across the transformer and a 
>safety gap across the transformer with the operating gap in series we 
>have full protection from high voltage surges and kick-back to the 
>transformer for this would fire the safety gap! The only condition 
>the gap would not protect against is a total short of the capacitor 
>but the neon transformer is designed to take a dead short for a 
>limited period of time besides that condition would cause excess 
>current flow in the primary which would trip the protective breaker 
>that should be in the primary circuit.
>                               Sincerely
>                                \\\|///
>                              \\  ~ ~  //
>                               (  -at- -at-  )
>                        -----o00o-(_)-o00o-----
>                           Alfred A. Skrocki
>                   alfred.skrocki-at-cybernetworking-dot-com
>                             .ooo0   0ooo.
>                        -----(   )---(   )-----
>                              \ (     ) /
>                               \_)   (_/