Re: rotary gap question

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: rotary gap question
From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com (by way of Terry Fritz <twf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 15:02:31 -0600
Approved: twf-at-verinet-dot-com

In a message dated 99-04-11 01:15:17 EDT, you write:

<< 
> What does using a rotary gap (not sync) acomplish?  What quality 
> makes it better than a static gap?
> Chris, via the inter-thingy  >>

Chris, all,

That's a good question.  A non-sync rotary is not always better than
a static gap.  In a small coil, or using an NST, a static gap may give
better results.   A rotary can be best for an NST system, but it has to
be a sync rotary.

In very high powered systems, a static gap may overheat, and fail to
quench, or it may fire too often.  The rotary is a timed switch, it sets
the firing rate as needed or desired.  It may also help to quell some of
the chaotic firing characteristics of static gaps.

Another distinct advantage of the rotary, is that it permits somewhat
independent control over the firing voltage and break rate.  This can
be achieved with a static gap, but requires an adjustment of the gap
spacings for each change.  This may be one of the greatest 
advantages of a rotary gap.

John Freau