Comparison of Multi-Gap and Static Gap

• To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
• Subject: Comparison of Multi-Gap and Static Gap
• From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
• Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 21:32:24 -0500
• Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

----------
From:  FutureT-at-aol-dot-com [SMTP:FutureT-at-aol-dot-com]
Sent:  Wednesday, June 03, 1998 1:44 PM
To:  tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject:  Re: Comparison of Multi-Gap and Static Gap

Terry, Malcolm, all,

Terry, I read your very interesting paper.  I was amazed that the
multi-gap was able to quench on the first energy transfer (first notch)
at k = .1, and that the single gap was able to quench on the 2nd
energy transfer, also at k = .1.  I didn't think either was possible using
such gap systems without spark streamer breakout.  

In work I've done at very low power with a small 1" to 4" long spark 
and no toroid, I had a lot of trouble in achieving quench at the
first notch using a 12 point series quenching rotary gap at k = .1.

I'm at a loss to explain why you are achieving this degree of quenching
which is better than what I would expect from my experiences.  Either
you've hit upon some synergistic coil style, or my quench expectations 
are incorrect.  

Have you allowed the streamers to emit to see how it changes things?

Comments welcome,

John Freau

• Prev: Changing NST Input Freq??
• Next: New Toroid
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread