Re: BPS vs Watts vs arc length

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>

Hi Steve,

On 3 Aug 01, at 11:07, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "S & J Young by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
<youngs-at-konnections-dot-net>
> 
> Hi all,
>  
> I took some measurements of my filtered DC powered coil to determine the
effect
> of break rate (BPS) verses DC watts for a constant length spark discharge
> between my twin TC toroids with breakout points.  I was hoping higher BPS
would
> be more efficient (same spark length at less power).  WRONG!  Once again,
John
> Freau is right - lower break rates appear to be more efficient.  
>  
> Here are measurements for a constant 30 inch discharge.  I set the BPS, then
> cranked up the power until the two coronas just joined and became brighter in
> the center of the arc.  For interest, I also show the AC VA into the two MOTs
> of my power supply.  The MOTs start saturating around 100 volts and the
current
> draw goes up fast.   Use courier new or some fixed width font:
>  
> BPS       Watts     VA
>  200      374.4     896 
>  300      379.5     651  
>  400      421.2     669
>  500      444.4     680
>  600      494.0     771
>  700      527.8     800
>  800      572.0     942 
>  900      626.4     924 
> 1000      680.0     982
>  
> The AC input volts go from 112 (MOTS highly saturated- thus the high VA)
at 200
> BPS down to 78 volts at 1000 BPS.   (The 800 BPS VA is probably bad data -
> should be about 865)
>  
> Some conclusions:
> 1) It appears spark length is nearly completely a function of power to the TC
> primary.  The BPS just complements the Variac as a method for controlling
> power.  Higher BPS is NOT more efficient.  But it sure is dramatic to run up
> the RPM and watch the sparks get longer and hotter as the "siren scream"
pitch
> from the arc goes up! 
>  
> 2) I did the same experiment with a 40 inch arc and got the same results -
> linear BPS VS power relationship.  Power was 590 to 929 watts for 300-1000
> BPS.  (At less than 300 BPS, there was not enough power input to produce 40
> inch sparks - power supply maxed out at 15 KV.)
>  
> 3) MOTS are free or cheap but inefficient when input volts goes above 95 or
> so.  A potential transformer would be much better. 
>  
> 4) MOTS with triplers are better than MOTS with doublers.  RSG performs much
> better at the higher voltages from a pair of triplers.
>  
> 5) The "Deanogap" (David Dean SPDT RSG configuration) continues to work
great! 
> Very efficient!  No power wasting series resistor!  Higher BPS per RPM!
Thanks
> again Deano.
>  
> --Steve 

>

From this discussion I read that one wants to produce the highest 
voltage possible per bang. One also wants to produce the highest 
terminal charge storage per bang. These are of course conflicting 
requirements. Where does the balance lie for a given primary energy 
seems to be the question.

Regards,
Malcolm