Re: The 1500t secondary myth (long)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "D.C. Cox" <resonance@xxxxxxxxxx>




One "tunes" a sparkgap by adjusting the dwell time.  This is usually
done by using a DC motor for the drive and then adjusting it's speed
with a small variac/rectifier/cap combination.  We use a lot of
the "tredmill" type motors available surplus.  We use 3,000 rpm motors
with a 1-2 HP rating.  We usually mount the spark gap rotor in a pillow
block configuration so we can change pulley sizes to adjust the rotor
speed in a range that is most effective.

You can also put a spark on both sides of the rotor and connect them in
series.  This is usually done at power levels above 7.5 kVA to provide
additional quenching.  You can also experiment with using one side of
rotor (dual gap) or both sides of rotor (quad gap) to see the effect of
quenching on your system.  Use a dual gap if possible at lower power
levels so you don't end up wasting all your energy in the form of heat
and light in the sparkgap.

Dr. Resonance


> Original poster: Bert Pool <bert.tx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> John Freau did an excellent job of describing Hull's magnifier
> work.  Thanks John!
> Bert
>
>
> At 01:03 PM 12/5/2004 -0700, you wrote:
> >Original poster: "David Rieben" <drieben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >Bert, Phil,
> >
> >I have to reiterate Phil's comment - please give us more dertails ;^
()
> >
> >David
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 11:42 PM
> >Subject: Re: The 1500t secondary myth (long)
> >
> >
> > > Original poster: FIFTYGUY@xxxxxxx
> > >
> > > In a message dated 12/4/04 11:17:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > > tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> > > Want an efficient, amazing coil?  Here's the secret in one
sentence:
> >follow
> > > Richard's lead - outrageous top loads, very high voltage potential
> > > transformers, small capacitors, and most importantly, very good 8
point
> > > series rotary gaps.
> > >
> > >      Thank you, Bert!
> > >      But could you quantify each of these conditions?
> > >      What constitutes an "outrageous" top load? In his widely-
posted
> > > article, Hull wrote: "We further found that the moderate sized
toroids
> >then
> > > used could be increased by one full order of magnitude and the
result
> >would
> > > be a fantastic increase in the amount of energy handling capacity
of a
> > > relatively small system!" This is something I'm leaning towards
myself,
> > > after a modest amount of experimentation.
> > >      How high is "very high" potential for a charging
transformer? Hull
> > > wrote, "Only one rule applies here. The voltage must be as high as
> > > possible!!!" Of course, I mentioned that maybe we should be
focusing SGTC
> > > efforts on how to charge the primary caps to higher voltages.
What kind of
> > > relationship exists between primary voltages and streamer length,
all
> >other
> > > factors equal?
> > >      How small are "small" caps? Again, Hull said: "When we hear
of a
> > > builder that uses more than 0.1 uF of capacitance, we wonder
about the
> > > builder. Our 10Kw Nemesis used only 0.09 uF of capacitance and
produced
> > > straight line, point to point arcs of 14-15 feet." Yet we have
folks on
> > > this list right now advocating caps at least 0.1 uF to produce
these kind
> > > of sparks.
> > >      And what makes a "very good" rotary? Hull wrote :"We have
designed a
> > > special series arc rotary quench gap that can actually quench
faster than
> > > required (also a bad condition)." If this is of the utmost
importance, how
> > > exactly was this done? The only picture I've seen of a TCBOR
rotary was a
> > > good-sized "propeller" gap. And how does one tune a rotary for
precisely
> > > the correct amount of quench?
> > >      I'm just deathly curious about how the TCBOR made magnifiers
with
> >such
> > > small resonators (which represent a huge cost and space savings)
that
> > > produced arc lengths of up to 7 times their height. I don't know
about
> > > everybody else, but I'd rather build a giant toroid than wind a
giant
> > > secondary (bringing this post back on topic :) ). I'd also rather
build a
> > > MMC of much smaller value but slightly higher voltage rating.
BTW, I read
> > > that Gary Lau has gotten best results yet by going to a much
smaller cap.
> > >      So what do(did?) all the current design programs have to
predict
> >about
> > > the performance of the TCBOR coils such as Nemesis and their last
> >magnifier?
> > >
> > > -Phil LaBudde
> > > (am I asking too many questions? :) )
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>