Rotary gap dwell

• To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
• Subject: Rotary gap dwell
• From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
• Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 08:52:38 -0500
• Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

From: 	FutureT-at-aol-dot-com[SMTP:FutureT-at-aol-dot-com]
Sent: 	Wednesday, September 24, 1997 3:28 AM
To: 	tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: 	Re: Primary Qs

In a message dated 97-09-23 20:13:58 EDT, you write:

<<snip>    The other problem with the wide gap though is that it
> tends to go out earlier in the piece. As I found, that is kickback
> generation  material. I'm in the process of learning to convert
> induction motors  for sync gaps which, based on much evidence 
> from Skip and John would seem to be the ideal choice of gap as 
> long as the dwell time is not excessively short.

Malcolm,

I don't think you have to worry about the mechanical dwell time
being excessively short.  I've used an offset electrode method in
the past which gave zero dwell time, and it did not shorten the
actual quench times at all.  I think the mechanical dwell makes 
no difference whatsoever as long as the dwell time is not so 
extremely long that it permits the cap to recharge and refire during 
the same gap firing, but I don't think we have to worry about that
happening using neon trannies at 120 bps where the caps take
"forever" to charge.   I also don't see how a static gap can
give a shorter quench time than a rotary (in general).  Certainly,
in certain cases it can, I realize.

Regards, 

John Freau

>     I've never had a problem ever with single shot testing from a 
> HVDC supply and it is the most potent weapon in my experimental 
> armoury.
 
> Regards,
> Malcolm
  >>

• Prev: neon rewind
• Next: Oil filled Secondary Coil
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread