---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 06:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: gweaver <gweaver-at-earthlink-dot-net>
To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
I have seen NST may times in other posts.
What does NST stand for?
At 09:39 PM 5/22/98 -0600, you wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 13:33:04 EDT
>From: FutureT <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>
>Subject: Re: 42" spark from 12/30 NST (fwd)
>In a message dated 98-05-21 23:55:03 EDT, you write:
>> You're talking about getting 42" sparks from a 12kv, 30ma NST?
>> That sounds pretty efficient--is it possible?
>You've probably already seen the specs for the above which I
>posted yesterday (?). There are a few keys to getting the most
>from an NST powered TC.
>First, resonant charging must be used...
>the cap size must be matched to the NST size so that the reactance
>of the tranformer is neutralized by the reactance of the cap. This
>allows the NST to draw more than its rated current, actually about
>double or more than its rated current. This coil draws 720 watts,
>not the 360 watts that would be expected.
>Second, a good gap system must be used. I've had the best
>results using synchronous rotary gaps with NST's.
>Third, the toroid must be the correct size for the system. It must
>be selected so that only one output spark streamer is produced.
>The production of multiple streamers will reduce the spark length
>a little. Also the coupling should be optimized to obtain best one
>streamer output. High secondary coil inductance also seems to
>be quite important.
>Many people on this list have cautioned that the NST may be
>strained by the above usage. This is possible, but I have not had
>any failures in my systems, whereas many people have reported
>NST failures while obtaining much shorter sparks. I will agree that
>this usage does push the capabilities of the NST. I recommend that
>this technique be used only by those who wish to obtain the maximum
>possible output from any given NST.