Re: Fine Tuning a Spark Gap

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Fine Tuning a Spark Gap
From: "Barton B. Anderson" <mopar-at-uswest-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:25:41 -0700
Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

Mike,
What I've heard has been from this list. Aluminum at RF frequencies is a poor
choice for a conductor. The conductance is affected by the frequency and
the Q of
the conductor drops. That's what I meant by RF suppression. I didn't mean the
frequency was suppressed.
Bart

Tesla List wrote:

> Original Poster: Hollmike-at-aol-dot-com
>
> In a message dated 10/27/98 10:57:36 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> tesla-at-pupman-dot-com writes:
>
> > I was discussing with someone today an idea of using
> >  aluminum
> >  components in a sparkgap. Not to conduct energy, but to utilize
aluminum's
> > RF
> >  suppression characteristic to enhance quenching.
> Bart, all,
>     Can anyone elaborate on the RF suppression of Aluminum?
> Thanks,
> Mike