Re: Spark gap...

Hi Gary, Daniel,

> Original Poster: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau-at-compaq-dot-com>


>As to airflow, I have found that airflow below a certain amount
>results in  very poor performance, and above that point, it
>doesn't really matter too much.  PSI is irrelevant.  What matters
>is how well the air is distributed so that the arcing channels are

> Original Poster: Erthwin-at-aol-dot-com


> benefit more from me making the gap wider and using low psi
> (20-30)
> essentially to cool the gap, or would it be better to make a
> smaller gap with
> large psi (100-150) where the air itself is quenching the
> gap? Thanks.

Iīm not quite sure that I can agree with Gary here (about the
question and answer I DIDNīT snip). If we take a certain
surface area (i.e: the gap) and blow air (with a nozzle size "X")
across it, we are doing nothing more than aiding the gap to quench.
If I now ONLY increase the applied air pressure, I would think it
would increase the gapīs ability to quench (sooner). I think the air
force (PSI) can be seen (an analogy) as a sort of CEMF to the
high voltage "wantings" to cross the gap. The higher the pressure,
the more "CEMF" is applied and the earlier the gap will stop
conducting. The problem, which I see with high pressure gaps is
the ability to "overquench". In other words, the energy transfer
(cycling) is interrupted too quickly and not all energy is transferred
(something which a RSG can NEVER do). This would result in a
less-than-optimal spark length output. Personally, I think the airflow
is irrelevant, above a certain minimum level, of course, which also
depends on design and power levels. More airflow (not pressure)
will not further aid in quenching the gap. It would only help keep the
electrodes, etc. cooler and also de-ionizes the area around the
electrodes more quickly. I also think you need a certain "ignition"
temperature at the gap. In other words (I think), a "super-cooled"
(like LN) gap would not make for a good spark gap.

Coiler greets from Germany,