Re: NST robustness

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: NST robustness
• From: "Malcolm Watts" <malcolm.watts-at-wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
• Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 17:59:45 -0700
• Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
• Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

Hi John,

> Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com 
> 
> In a message dated 00-02-24 09:33:10 EST, you write:
> 
> << Why do you think that is?  My latest thinking on the subject (about a 
> > year old) is that it should be better if the gap is set to, say, 15kV as 
> >you then have an extra margin of safety up your sleeve. It seems to 
> > have worked for me so far but then I haven't had the guts to do an 
> > acid test of this theory.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Malcolm
> 
> Hi Malcolm
> 
> My reasoning on the 15/30 NST's being weak is that they are the
> same physical size as a 12kV unit, so the pathways for shorting
> inside are stressed more by 15kV than by 12kV.  Also the 15kV
> may have thinner wire and thinner insulation.  I suspect that a
> 7.5kV, 60ma, still the same physical size, may be even more 
> robust.  

Have you found any evidence that a 15kV NST dies more readily 
than a 12kV NST if the gap is set only to, say, 15kV?  I'm interested 
in the idea that the higher voltage transformer might have thinner 
wire despite an identical current rating. If they had the same size 
wire and core however, I think your argument sounds quite plausible.

Regards,
Malcolm

• Prev: RE: Small Audio Modulated VTTC
• Next: Please forward this to TCML (Reply to firestarters)
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread