Re: RSG

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: RSG
• From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
• Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 11:51:49 -0600
• Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
• Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

In a message dated 99-08-03 19:56:53 EDT, you write:

<< to: Jon
 
> We usually use a non-synchro RSG running 10 electrodes spinning 1725 RPM
> with 4 total spark gaps.  We run two gaps on each side of the rotor and
> connect them in series.
 
> I will have a unique opportunity to test and synchro vs non-synchro in the
 >very near future.  We just finished a large coil with a 10 ft spark and at
> present it is set up with a non-synchro RSG as described above.  During our
> operational tests next week we are going to replace the 4 gap system with a
> 4 gap synchro RSG running at 1800 RPM.  The close speed relationship should
> provide an interesting comparison of system output.

Hi DR R.

Due to missed firings with the non-sync gap, I wouldn't be surprised if
it has a lower true break-rate than a 240 bps sync gap.  This lower 
break rate might tend to improve the efficiency slightly.  But the
relatively erratic power feed from the non-sync gap might hurt the
efficiency a little, so the two might tend to balance out to an extent.

In any case, It would be interesting IMO to compare 120 bps sync
operation with the higher bps non-sync operation, but of course a
larger tank cap (or higher voltage) would be needed to keep the power
input the same.  The 120 bps sparks might be dimmer though, and
I realize for your work you need bright sparks for best effect.

Regards,
John Freau

> Regards,
 
> Dr.Resonance
  >>

• Prev: Re: Designing an optimized Magnifier
• Next: Transformer basics
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread