Fwd: Re: SRSG info

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

Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>


>Delivered-To: teslalist-at-mail-dnvr.uswest-dot-net
>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 06:55:59 -0400
>From: dhmccauley-at-spacecatlighting-dot-com
>To: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>X-Envelope-From: dhmccauley-at-spacecatlighting-dot-com  Thu Jun 19 04:58:21 2003
>Reply-To: <dhmccauley-at-spacecatlighting-dot-com>
>Subject: Re: SRSG info
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
>X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with 
>any abuse report
>X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - trueman.myhostdns-dot-com
>X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - pupman-dot-com
>X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [0 0]
>X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - spacecatlighting-dot-com
>X-DCC-servers-Metrics: dick.jymis-dot-com 1049; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
>
>Matter of preference when dealing with lower powers.  I went straight to a
>SRSG for my first tesla coil.  But then again, a static gap would have
>performed just as well
>
>Also, there are other type of gaps too.
>Sucker gaps
>SRSG
>ARSG
>Blower gaps
>
>The Captain
>
>
> > Would like to know if there is a rule of thumb relative as at what point
>do
> > you switch over from stationary spark gap to SRSG?
> > Is there a some sort of a criteria, because I was told that if you are
> > running under 2kW of power there is no need for SRSG, just stick with the
> > pipes?
> > Comments welcome
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >