[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Magnetic quenched gaps
From: gweaver[SMTP:gweaver-at-earthlink-dot-net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 1997 11:45 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: Magnetic quenched gaps
I don't know anything about magnetic quenching gaps. Last spring there were
a few posts about this but no details. I might be willing to experement
with this if I could learn something about it first.
What are the advantages and disadvantages over other gap systems?
Gary Weaver
At 11:54 PM 9/17/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>From: Alfred A. Skrocki[SMTP:alfred.skrocki-at-cybernetworking-dot-com]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 1997 8:54 AM
>To: Tesla List
>Subject: Re: Magnetic quenched gaps
>
>On Tuesday, September 16, 1997 6:32 PM Dale F. Pfaffle
>[SMTP:pfaffle-at-tele-net-dot-net] wrote;
>
>> Being new here this may have been discussed before but, I have not seen
>> anyone mention quenching with a magnetic field. Are they not very good, to
>> hard to tune/maintain, or the other methods are just better.
>> Thanks,
>
>
>Incredible! I was honestly just thinking of opening up the subject of
>magnetic quenching, while reading todays messages, and here you
>went and beat me to the punch! I suspect we hear so little about
>magnetic quenching because it is not as well understood as the less
>subtle rotary gaps or stationary gaps with a fan. I don't know if
>anyone has ever done any serious work to compare a magnetically
>quenched gap to a fan quenched stationary gap or a rotary. I always
>liked the subtlety of the magnetically quenched gap though. I was
>going to ask if anyone out there is currently playing with magnetic
>quenching.
>
> Sincerely
>
> \\\|///
> \\ ~ ~ //
> ( -at- -at- )
> -----o00o-(_)-o00o-----
> Alfred A. Skrocki
> Alfred.Skrocki-at-CyberNetworking-dot-com
> .ooo0 0ooo.
> -----( )---( )-----
> \ ( ) /
> \_) (_/
>
>
>
>
>