Re: Primary Heating

["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 3/11/02 11:36:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:

Scot,

In a well designed TC, I don't think the spark gap losses are that
large.  For example they may be 15% or so in my old research
coil I'm guessing.  This only translates into a 4% spark length
difference or so.  When I tried the STSG, the noise and flaring
light was much greater than my SRSG, yet the spark length
was the same.  One would think that the loud sound and
bright flaring light of the STSG would cause a noticeable 
difference in the spark length, yet it did not.  This suggests
to me that the losses are not that large to begin with.  This
is because a large percentage increase in a small loss, does
not change the overall efficiency or spark length that much. 

Also, If I remember correctly, work done by Malcolm and Bert H, 
suggests that the gap losses are not all that large.  I also did some
measurements of my own, although they were somewhat crude,
and they also suggested losses of around 15% or less.

Cheers,
John


>
> Hi All...
>
> after reading many of the primary heating threads, I began to wonder if 
> ( since we have so many great minds at work here ;)   ) someone has 
> pondered the fact that we lose way too much energy in the spark gap that 
> could be effectively transposed into the secondary/capacitor. Is there 
> any way to reduce the losses in the spark gap, or is this a mute subject???
>
> there is alot of energy lost ... consider the light produced, the heat 
> produced... if we could only regain that energy and put it where it 
> needs to go.....    maybe a 20% increase in streamer lenght ... if not 
> more???
>
> come on people lets give it a thought or 10 ....  just maybe we can come 
> up with a new approach ...
>
>
> hmmmmmmm    deep in thought
>
> Scot D