Q

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Dirk,

I've built TCBOR/RQ gaps as well as just linear sparks gaps. Yes, 
when building within a large PVC pipe, the benefit is air 
circulation, but the downfall is gap to gap adjustment and linearity 
of that adjustment. I have (not sure what others have decided on) 
decided that a linear gap is just as good. I like linear pipe designs 
because using epoxy, it's very easy to set each gap to "exact" 
dimensions. I am currently selling a lineary pipe arrangement at my 
site. Each gap between all 10 pipes is exactly 0.026 inch. You have 
difficult maintaining this type of precision with TCBOR/RQ gap arrangements.

However, with linear gaps, the air flow is very important for a 
decent operating gap. Too much, and the gap will be speratic. Too 
little, and it will work for as long as it takes the gap too heat up 
and lower the arc voltage. Easily seen by the sparks getting shorter 
and shorter from turn on.

Cooling is the real advantage to TCBOR/RQ gaps. There is no reason 
why one of these gaps can't be built as exact as a linear gap. The 
only problem, most coilers default to some type of screw attachment 
for the pipes. Get rid of the screw attachment, go to epoxy, and the 
problem is solved. It's that simple. The problem (with me): I'm just 
plain lazy! I used screws at first just like most others and haven't 
changed it. I used linear pipe segments with epoxy and I was happy 
(at least for NST powered coils). I should now simple reset the PVC 
pipe gaps as I have with the linear gaps.

Thanks for asking the question. You got me thinking. I guess I'll 
have to rebuild a couple of my TCBOR/RQ gaps as I have done with my 
linear gaps and see how it goes.

BTW, why TCBOR/RQ as a term for the PVC pipe gap? Well, because both 
TCBOR and Richard Quick were instrumental in this gap design. It's 
just better for the list to describe this gap design in this 
terminology, than to debate who was first on this design. Either way, 
it is a great design. But, updates and variations to it are certainly 
welcome to those of use who are still spark gap die hards. I love all 
the SSTC work, but that's just not my desire (at least, not yet).

Take care,
Bart

Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Dirk Stubbs" <dirk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> What is the benefit of building a multi-gap  spark gap using copper 
> pipe segments within a large diameter pipe (such as 5")? This design 
> seems difficult since you are drilling round stock and cant 
> adjustment be difficult?  What type of designs do you suggest as an 
> alternative?
>
> Thanks,
> Dirk
>
> -