Modeling a magnifier

To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Modeling a magnifier
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 23:49:08 -0600
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

----------
From:  Greg Leyh [SMTP:lod-at-pacbell-dot-net]
Sent:  Sunday, February 22, 1998 4:17 AM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: Modeling a magnifier

Robert W. Stephens wrote:

[snip]
> Maybe the unwashed masses representing the classical croud among us should
> try rotary gaps that quench in tens of microseconds rather than the hundreds of
> microseconds which is normal on most of our classical coils.
> Certainly the multi-swept gaps of the maggys perform the
> function of putting out the fire quickly by virtue of increasing the
> approach and departure velocities of the electrodes greatly over
> simpler 2 or 4 gap rotary designs.

I haven't seen much mention on the List regarding 
the design and performance of multiple-swept gaps;
usually its all about 2-gap rotaries in series with
an array of static quench gaps.

Realistically, most rotary gap systems have actual
mechanical dwell times of many hundreds of usec's,
if you consider the edge speeds, electrode widths,
and the distance the electrodes must travel before
the arc can be broken.  There is little chance that
_any combination_  of rotary and static gaps could
quench in tens of usec's strictly _by themselves_;
that is without a big arc hanging off the top of
the output coil, stealing away most of the energy 
before it can bounce back to the primary.
Even the finest and best thought out rotary/static
gap combinations will ring for hundreds of usec's 
_if_ the toroid is large enough to prevent breakout.

-GL