Re: Async gap with rectified NST PS

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

Original poster: "Jason by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <jasonp-at-btinternet-dot-com>

Aric,

With a breakrate that high you will never reach full cap voltage... it isnt
worth it at all. I think that the optimum for a MOT system is a well built
closely spaced gap running at 45 and 135 degrees, or at 45, 90 and 134
degrees (300 or 400bps here in the UK). 1400bps would only serve to ruin
your caps because the current flow would be so high. I doubt if even the
classical pulse caps such as maxwells could take this kind of strain

Regards,
Jason
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:06 PM
Subject: Async gap with rectified NST PS


> Original poster: "Rothman, Aric by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <Aric.Rothman-at-Honeywell-dot-com>
>
> I am in the middle of construction of a high break rate (~1,400 bps)
rotary
> spark gap.  It will consist of a phenolic disk with belt drive from a 3450
> motor, with appropriately sized sheaves to increase the rotational rate of
> the disk.  The intended power supply will the MOT voltage doubler with
> charging inductor as described in Greg Hunter's site.  In the event that
> performance is poor or the power supply self-destructs (I am concerned
about
> insulation breakdown in the MOT charging inductor, making it a charring
> inductor :), I would like to use NSTs as backup.  I would rectify the NST
> output, thereby protecting them from the async gap tendency to otherwise
> allow excessive voltage rise in the tank circuit.  Will this work without
> putting the NSTs at too great a risk?  The Maxwell caps I am using will
each
> have there own spark gap protection.
>
> Aric
>
>
>
>