Re: Dump the RSG!

To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: Dump the RSG!
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 23:08:35 -0600
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

From: 	randy-at-gte-dot-net[SMTP:randy-at-gte-dot-net]
Sent: 	Monday, November 03, 1997 11:31 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: Dump the RSG!

Tesla List wrote:
> 
> From:   gweaver[SMTP:gweaver-at-earthlink-dot-net]
> Sent:   Sunday, November 02, 1997 11:27 PM
> To:     Tesla List
> Subject:        Re: Dump the RSG!
> 
> I have been thinking the exact same thing.  I have also been straining my
> brain trying to figure out how to build such a spark gap device.  Naturally
> you will have to forget the cost because you can't build it for $100. unless
> you have access to some free parts.  The next problem to deal with is the
> high voltage.  I have 30 SCR's 600 VAC 400 AMPS and if I connect all in
> series I get 18,000. volts.  Brake over voltage will make the SCR's conduct
> during the half cycle and turn off during the other half cycle but the HV
> feed back voltage will probably kill all the SCR's.  There are some tubes
> available for HV but they won't handle the current, but I could put several
> tubes in parallel and create a night mare spark gap.  A triode tube rated
> 10,000. volts 1 amps might do the trick. The power supply voltage will have
> to be less than 10K or two tubes could be connected in series for 20K.  The
> tubes can be set in cutoff and conduct only on the peak of the AC cycles.  A
> properly sized capacitor on the screen grid might help to adjust the dwell
> time.  Two tubes in series will have to have a battery power supply for the
> heaters because the HV would arc threw transformers power supplies and fry
> everything.  The TC would have to be sized to the power rating of the tube
> or more tubes could be added in parallel to get more power.  The problem is,
> the thing we need for this spark gap has not been invented yet. That didn't
> stop Thomas Edison he just invented what ever he needed.
> 
> Gary Weaver
> 


Ye Gods! Did someone praise Edison _here_??????
If he didn't have the thing he needed and didn't invent it.....
<cough, cough>



> At 10:35 PM 11/2/97 -0600, you wrote:
> >
> >From:  richard hull[SMTP:rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net]
> >Sent:  Sunday, November 02, 1997 4:05 AM
> >To:    Tesla List
> >Subject:       Re: Dump the RSG!
> >
> >At 02:42 PM 11/1/97 -0600, you wrote:
> >>
> >>From:         Greg Leyh[SMTP:lod-at-pacbell-dot-net]
> >>Sent:         Saturday, November 01, 1997 6:17 AM
> >>To:   Tesla List
> >>Subject:      Re: Dump the RSG!
> >>
> >>bmack wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Seeing so many RSG posts, and the problems associated with
> >>> them, made me wonder why not move on to something better?
> >>
> >>[snip]
> >>
> >>> Personally,I believe since we are now 100 years hence, we should be able
> >>> to process a good deal of power without all that arcing and sparking
> >>> in the primary circuit. Leave that for the secondary!
> >>
> >>Why not move on to solid-state, and avoid the moving parts as well?
> >>
> >>
> >>-GL
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Wow!  That is great!  Just what we have been waiting for!  What catalog can
> >I order a solid state switch that can commutate 20 -50 megawatt pulses with
> >peak currents near 1000amps at 20,000 volts about 500 times per second?  Oh
> >yeah, its gotta cost me no more than my current gap system.
> >(~$100.00)......Also it would be nice if I could repair it if something goes
> >highorder in it.  I eagerly await the reply....I too, am tired of farting
> >around with all this mechanical junk!!!!
> >
> >Richard Hull, TCBOR
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >