Re: Tank cap problem

["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>

Hi Malcom, Terry, All

Triggered gaps are very good bu can be inefficient if not properly made. I
would go for an RQ style multi stage gap with the trigger between the first
and second segments of the pipe personally.

Regards,
Jason
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: Tank cap problem


> Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
>
> Hi Malcolm,
>
> The triggered gap's much hotter arc channel seems to give better
> performance.  Although the loss charts:
>
> http://hot-streamer-dot-com/temp/TgapCompare.gif
>
> do not show a giant difference.  "I think" the very clean switching action
> is doing something good.  I don't have much to back that up, but it is my
> "feeling" that the triggered gaps seem to really "like" to produce
> streamers.  More work is needed...  Perhaps the zero crossings are not
> wasting power but confusing the coil's smooth operation to some extent...
>
> Triggered gap work very well.  However, they are not working the way "i"
> think they should.  There are some new subtle things going on.  I keep
> thinking it is miss firing or noise affecting the dimmers but there is
more
> going on...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Terry
>
>
> At 08:59 AM 9/4/2001 +1200, you wrote:
> >Hi Terry,
> >
> >On 3 Sep 2001, at 12:51, Tesla list wrote:
> >
> >> Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
> >>
> >> Hi Frank,
> >>
> >> Triggered gaps would basically act as a direct replacement for rotary
sync
> >> gaps.
> >>
> >> 1.  They can be far more easily controlled and the dwell angle is a
simple
> >knob
> >> adjustement.
> >>
> >> 2.  They appear to have lower loss and thus allow more energy to go
into the
> >> streamers.
> >
> >Does that really stand to reason? How can a gap with a longer
> >discharge path really have a lower loss than one with a shorter
> >discharge path? Dr Rzesotarski's figures clearly show the triggered
> >gap as having the higher loss of the two he measured.
> >     The one saving grace might be the early quench thereby reducing
> >losses by preventing more than a single energy transfer but that
> >doesn't = a lower conduction loss.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Malcolm
> >
msnip...