Re: Better Spark Gaps

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

Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>

In a message dated 4/12/02 2:50:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:


>
> Hi all, 
>    Just wondering.   Would a couple of very closely spaced gaps(think quench
> gaps) in series with a triggered gap allow a smaller gap spacing for the
> actual
> triggered gap?   would it improve the efficiency?' 
> Mike 
>
>
> Mike

,

Some work that has been done seems to suggest that series
gaps give higher losses, and don't improve efficiency in an
overall manner, although the quenching tends to be better.
Other work shows little difference in losses with series gaps.
I think more work needs to be done.  Once you have a 
reasonably good gap, getting longer sparks by improving
the gap has proved almost impossible so far.

It can be stated as a general truth, that many gap systems
have been tried over the years, yet none has demonstrated
any real advantage over the old; SRSG, the RSG, nor the
single static gap with air blast.  The STSG may be easier
for some folks to construct, but doesn't seem to increase
the spark length.

Consider this as a thought experiment.  The gap spacing
in a TSG is much wider than in a RSG, yet the spark output
length is the same.  This seems to suggest that if the
gap spacing can be made shorter, the spark length will
still most likely be about the same.  The idea of improving 
spark gaps, may not give such a great improvement as some
hope for, even if it is possible.

Cheers,
John