Re: nitrogen laser triggered gap

["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 5/3/02 1:04:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:


>
> also is a triggered gap as good as a rotary?
> many thanks
> colin heath



Colin,

A triggered gap is as good as a rotary in many ways.
In the tests I did, it gave the same spark lengths as a
sync rotary gap did.  Theoretically, the gap losses should
be higher in a triggered gap, due to the longer gap sparking
distance.  The triggered gap produces more noise and
light in the gap than a rotary.  Many folks like the triggered gap,
because they can avoid the mechanical precision needed
to build a rotary gap.  Also, one not need worry about the
potential danger of the rotating mass of the rotary.
I personally find the rotaries easier to deal with, but
I plan to do more triggered gap tests.

Triggered gaps may need air blast or fan quenching, depending
on the power level.  The triggered gaps have not been tested
at very high power levels as far as I know.

Cheers,
John