Re: sparkless rotary spark gap (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 04:34:56 +0000
From: ameen_ghavam@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: sparkless rotary spark gap (fwd)

          Thanx Scott,
                     It was shortly afterw writing the message that I realised some issues. I was simply caught up in the moment. :) 
                     Cheers,
                            Ameen Ghavam

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> 

> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- 
> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:22:21 -0400 
> From: Scott Bogard 
> To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx 
> Subject: Re: sparkless rotary spark gap (fwd) 
> 
> Ameen, 
> This Idea has already been thought of, check the archives under "full 
> contact spark gap". My idea was to have a rotary gap, but instead of have 
> electrodes pass by each other, the G10 or whatever disk would have the 
> tungsten flush with the surface, and the disk would be pinched between 2 
> bronze rollers or bushings. There are, as several have already said, 
> problems with this scenario. So, how do you prevent arcing before contact, 
> which would allow most of the ring down to occur before contact, negating 
> any benefits. I suggested the use of an insulator (like really good oil) 
> under which the disk could be submerged, this will allow the electrodes to 
> get much closer (until the oil gets spoiled, so one will have to filter it 
> constantly), but they will still arc to an extant. Another preventive 
> method would be to have about 8 or more disks in series, so that the arctime 
> before contact would be practically 0 (as the physical distance would be 
> greater, and approach 0 much faster). Together these may lead to a working 
> gap, but look how complicated it has become. As scary as solid state stuff 
> seems to a person like myself, with virtually no semiconductor experience or 
> training, it is (for now at least) the way to go. I have read in "popular 
> science" that carbon nanotube technology will allow the construction of 
> semiconductors that will be much much better than that currently available 
> (1 tube can conduct 1000 times better than copper of the same size, which is 
> very small granted), when this technology is perfected (I should say "if") 
> very good things could happen in the coiling world. But, with all that 
> said, there is absolutely no reason you should not try to build a full 
> contact spark gap. Good luck. 
> Scott Bogard. 
> 
> >From: "Tesla list" 
> >To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx 
> >Subject: Re: sparkless rotary spark gap (fwd) 
> >Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 06:48:53 -0600 (MDT) 
> > 
> > 
> >---------- Forwarded message ---------- 
> >Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:49:49 +0100 
> >From: Chris Swinson 
> >To: Tesla list 
> >Subject: Re: sparkless rotary spark gap (fwd) 
> > 
> >Ameen, 
> > 
> >How do you plan to hold off 10KV from your electrodes until they touch ? 
> > 
> >Chris 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >----- Original Message ----- 
> >From: "Tesla list" 
> >To: 
> >Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 2:33 AM 
> >Subject: sparkless rotary spark gap (fwd) 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- 
> > > Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 00:58:02 +0000 
> > > From: ameen_ghavam@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > To: Tesla list 
> > > Subject: sparkless rotary spark gap 
> > > 
> > > Alright, I'm no exptert, but I can't seem to see why it's 
> > > absolutely necessary to have a rotary gap spark as suppose to just 
> > > touching electrodes. If your electrodes touched, there would be no 
> >worries 
> > > about quenching or overheating, but the capacitor still discharges. This 
> > > does mean, however, that the circuit resonates a lot longer and gives 
> >the 
> > > capacitor less charging time. But it could be a fair tradeoff 
> >considering 
> > > that more energy overall is transfered into the secondary. The 
> >efficiency 
> > > may not improve, but no quenching or overheating worries, just physical 
> > > erosion to the electrode. 
> > > Does anyone see a reason why that wouldn't be a 
> > > good idea? 
> > > Ameen Ghavam 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________ 
> Learn.Laugh.Share. Reallivemoms is right place! 
> http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us 
> 
> 
>