Re: Question - RQ spark gap plans (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 04:05:13 GMT
From: Jim Fosse <jim.fosse-at-bjt-dot-net>
To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Cc: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com
Subject: Re: Question - RQ spark gap plans (fwd)

>Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 20:11:18 -0600
>From: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com
>To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>Subject: Question - RQ spark gap plans (fwd)
>        Many people have found that the RQ spark gap is better in their
>systems.  Preliminary testing I have done suggests the opposite.  However, I
>now have a theory as to why these gaps may give much better secondary sparks
>(this may lead to even better designs).  I would like to build and RQ style
>gap to test my theory out.  I have built similar gaps but they would not
>show the proper effects I seek.
>        I do have one concern.  As I understand the gap, there are many
>copper pipe sections side by side.  I would think that the higher electric
>field intensity at the ends of the pipes would cause the arcs to occur only
>at the ends of the pipe sections instead if near the centers where we would
>like.  Is this true and if not why not?  
	Mine has sparks the jump randomly along the length of each
pipe section. I've not delved into the whyfors;)