Re: srsg behaviour

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

Original poster: "Finn Hammer by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <f-h-at-c.dk>

Claude!

I`m not sure you are asking for help, but since 4 pack MOT`S and 300 BPS
is my pot, allow me to expand on, what the missing ingredience is.

You need to "spice" with a bit of Microsim.

Or any other simulation package, preferably backed up with a high
voltage monitoring sysem, consistig of an interface to a scope.

It has been said that there is no power advantage in equal bangsize at
300 and more BPS, but I disagree. What you are seing is exactly the
problems that come about, by having no controll over the bangsize. When
the safety gap fires it is simply because there is no SRSG electrode
presentation available to discharge the cap. So the safety gap does it,
without being able to properly handle the current.

The amount of power you can put trough with a 300 BPS system is greater
than with a static at the same ballasting, and such a system really
sings! A crisp, high pitched tone that will leave you addicted for good!

Your cap is small for the power you are running, above 100 nF would be a
better ballpark value, for 300 BPS, but you need to place the electrodes
pretty exactly to make it sing, and the position of the gaps that
results in equal BPS is different at various power levels.

However, I have had good results simulating this kind of system, and
been able to validate the model in practical work.

Have a look at:
http://home5.inet.tele.dk/f-hammer/tesla/museum/setup/setup.htm

Having learned to use Microsim myself, and also having built the
Fiberprobe system to safely monitor the primary circuit, I am of the
opinion that you cannot set up "300 BPS and up" systems without it.

I am very gratefull for the tuition that Terry gave me back in the past,
on how to simulate, and if anybody is interested in learning how to,
now, I will be happy to pay back, and pass some of that knowledge on.

Cheers, Finn Hammer

Tesla list skriver:
 >
 > Original poster: "claude masetto by way of Terry Fritz 
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <claudmas-at-optusnet-dot-com.au>
 >
 > Hello all,
 > I have just completed and run a 300 bps srsg on my coil and have noted the
 > following points.
 > Coil specs - 4 pack MOT supply- 0.047uf tank cap- secondary is 4"x24"-
 > toroid is 4"x22" on top of a smaller 4"x16"
 > 1) Streamers are about the same length (55") as with my single static gap
 > but with the static gap they are much thicker and brighter.
 > 2) A lot more multiple streamers with the srsg and they look thinner and
 > weaker.
 > 3) Tried a 200 bps srsg before this and did not notice any great difference
 > in performance between this and 300 bps. I have no idea where in the cycle
 > the gap is firing, I just adjust the phase angle for best performance.
 > 4) Static gap is much louder.
 > 5) Have to use ballast with the static gap otherwise it powerarcs however
 > with the srsg I don't have to use any ballast. Actually the best performance
 > is without a ballast and the line current with the srsg is much lower than
 > with the static gap.
 > 6) I've noticed that when I increase the variac to almost full power the
 > saftey gaps fire severly and then I have to switch of and start another run.
 > I widened the saftey gaps a little and this helped a bit but it gets to a
 > point where they fire continously and the srsg does not fire at all. I
 > prefer not to open the saftey gaps further as I might risk overvolting the
 > tank cap. I can still increase the power input if it was'nt for this
 > problem. What could cause this and is this normal with a srsg.
 > 7) At the moment I still prefer the look of the sparks with the single
 > static gap even though quenching is a problem. It seems to be a balance
 > between the right balast for a given size tank cap.
 > Anyway, that's what I've noticed.
 > I think the srsg has improved the quenching problem but I was hoping that it
 > would also result in longer streamers. Maybe I am missing something.
 >
 > Best wishes for the season
 > Claude.