Re: Fw: frequency (fwd)

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Fw: frequency (fwd)
From: "Trent" <trent-at-iex-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <twf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:12:44 -0600
Approved: twf-at-verinet-dot-com
Hello Alex,

  Thanx for your response.  Can you tell me what a "reso cap" is?


Best regards,
                              Trent
-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Date: Saturday, April 17, 1999 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: frequency (fwd)


>Original Poster: Alex Crow <user-at-alexcrow.clara-dot-net>
>
>Trent
>
>BPS with a static gap can go over 120bps at 60Hz mains freq. If the cap is
>small - impedance at 60Hz higher than the HV tranformer secondary (ie less
than
>resonant size), it will charge up to the breakdown voltage of the gap in
less
>than one half-cycle, and thus you will often get more than one bang. A
resonant
>cap may also deliver greater than 120bps due to the voltage rise it
produces.
>Often with a reso cap you turn *down* the input volts to get back to 120
again.
>Larger cap sizes will, of course, take longer to charge up and then you can
get
>lower break rates.
>
>As for rotary gaps, I'm not an expert. All I know is that a sync rotary
gives a
>much more stable break rate, is generally better quenching and more
efficient,
>and stresses your components less. You can also adjust the phase of firing.
>
>Alex
>
>
>
>
>
>Tesla List wrote:
>
>> Original Poster: Tesla List <mod1-at-pupman-dot-com>
>>
>> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:56:53 -0500
>> >From: Marius Grigoriu <compwiz-at-stratos-dot-net>
>> >To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>> >Subject: Re: frequency
>> >
>> >Tesla List wrote:
>> >
>> >> Original Poster: "Trent" <trent-at-iex-dot-net>
>> >>
>> >> Hello All,
>> >>
>> >> Q:  Is it possible to have an input frequency greater than the 60
cycles
>> going
>> >> to the spark gap/primary, and if so, how?
>> >>
>> >> Thx,
>> >>           AT
>> >
>> >Again, I am posting to learn, so if I'm wrong, don't get mad :)
>> >
>> >The whole idea of the spark gap and capacitor is to convert those 60 or
50
>> cycles
>> >to RF current so it can resonate with the secondary. If you have a
current
>> source
>> >of the right frequency, you should be able to take it directly to the
>> primary,
>> >skipping the gap.
>> >
>> >Am I correct in my statments?
>> >Marius Grigroiu
>> >
>>
>> Dear Marius et al,
>>
>>   Hmmm...your question is interesting and somewhat akin to what I am
seeking
>> to understand; however my aim is NOT to eliminate the spark gap as it is
the
>> source of the damped wave (DW) oscillations I feel are important in my
work.
>>
>>   I am working with electromedical devices and am attempting to
understand
>> the relationship between the frequency of the incoming voltage/current
>>  typically 60 cps) with regard to the charging of the capacitor and the
>> breaks per second (bps) of the spark gap.  It appears that the maximum
bps
>> with a static gap are limited to 120.
>>
>>   This limit doesn't appear to apply to a rotary gap.  My questions:  How
>> does the use of a rotary gap effect the charging of the capacitor, the
break
>> down of the gap and the power transfer across the gap, when subject to
the
>> typical incoming frequency?  Aren't we sacrificing power by increasing
the
>> bps?  Is it possible, say by using a higher frequency input, to increase
the
>> charge to the capacitor, thereby increasing the power across the gap,
>> resulting in greater effectiveness of the system?
>>
>>   I'm looking at the possibility of using a 400cps input in an attempt to
>> realize greater efficiency from a rotary gap system; any input/feedback
is
>> welcomed.
>>
>>   Thanx and best regards,
>>                                                   Trent
>
>
>