Re: NSTs and Cap Charging (tests)(was 2 questions......)

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: NSTs and Cap Charging (tests)(was 2 questions......)
• From: "Malcolm Watts" <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:03:10 -0600
• Approved: twf-at-verinet-dot-com

Hi John,

> Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com 
> 
> In a message dated 99-04-11 05:05:12 EDT, you write:
> 
> << With the larger cap, with static gap or sync rotary, I saw below rated
> > power being drawn by the NST, unless I turned up the input voltage
> > to over 120 volts input.  But I have to try fiddling a little more with
> > the sync phase to see if I can get it to draw more power at 120 volts
> > input.
>  
> > John Freau
>    >>
> 
> Malcolm, Terry, Gary, Bert, Richie, all,
> 
> I still didn't answer the above fully, but I rechecked some of my 
> tests, and made some new findings.
> 
> Using the original resonant charging set up with the 12kV, 30ma NST,
> and the .0077uF cap, I rephased the sync gap to a new position which
> gave me 42" sparks at only 640 watts.  So this now equals the
> performance I obtained with the LTRS (larger than resonant sized) cap.
> This was the major finding.

I'm guessing that the gap firing voltage is now higher at this new 
position? Are you able to check this? It would be worth knowing 
because if it is, it would point to LTRS Cap being a preffered 
option. It would also tell us whether the bang energies are the same 
or whether there is more of a cont. power correlation to spark length.
Nice expts. Thankyou for doing them and reporting.

Regards,
Malcolm

• Prev: Re: Idea for monitoring MMC operation
• Next: RE: Rolled PE Caps
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread