RE: How low can a spark gap go?

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>

It does seem that the importance of quenching may be over-rated.  But
truthfully, my experience should not be taken to be proof of that.  The
problem is that with spark gaps, one cannot alter losses or quenching
without altering the other, so we end up comparing apples to oranges.
Perhaps when SISG technology matures, a true comparison can be made,
keeping Rgap constant and varying quench time.

Regards, Gary Lau
MA, USA

> Original poster: G Hunter <dogbrain_39560@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> This is not unprecedented. Years ago on his web site
> Gary Lau reported his single static sucker gap had
> very low losses, resulting in a high Q primary
> circuit. He also found that quenching was awful, yet
> his NST-based coil performed very well! From where did
> we learn the dogma that extraordinary measures must be
> taken with our coils & spark gaps to achieve first
> notch quenching? Seems like many "real" Tesla coils
> work great without any regard to quenching!
>
> Greg


>  > The PIRANHA has a big Cp and sort of low Lp so the Q
>  > is only about 30
>  > despite the low Rp of 0.25 (it is actually a bit
>  > less).  Quenching
>  > might help there, but ScanTesla does not report any
>  > giant advantage
>  > or anything.
>  >
>  > So I am going with no quench and no sync triggering.
>  >  Just letting
>  > the thing do as it pleases, and it seems very happy
>  > ;-)))
>  >
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  >
>  >          Terry