Re: Fw: Arc Impedance Study - Computer Models

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Fw: Arc Impedance Study - Computer Models
• From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:59:33 -0600
• Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

In a message dated 98-10-13 01:43:50 EDT, you write:

<< >        I run a large cap small Lp coil on quite modest primary 
 > voltages with a single static and get sterling performance with no 
 > gap cooling, airflow etc. However, running with a small cap and the 
 > same leakage-L limited transformer, the same gap does not do the job 
 > and requires the extras to perform. Anyone else found this? Resonant 
 > charging systems in particular seem to perform well with the simpler 
 > gaps.
 > 
 > Observations invited,
 > Malcolm
 >  >>

Malcolm, all,

This is very interesting.  One would think that the smaller cap would
allow for easier quenching, unless the faster firing repetition is keeping
the gaps too hot (?)  Using resonant charging, the gap firing will occur
when the mains are at a low voltage, this may help prevent some sort
of power arcing conditions?  But then again, quench doesn't matter
much.  I think I've seen the same effects you
noted, but my experiments weren't well controlled.  I suspect that 
when the cap is too small, it does a poor job of exciting the TC, it's
like trying to break a rock by striking it with a toothpick, instead of
a sledgehammer.  Does this seem reasonable in any way?

John Freau 

• Prev: The vac pump problem
• Next: Re: Welder ballasts vs. other types
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread