Re: ARSG Motors (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:37:55 -0400
From: Scott Bogard <teslas-intern@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: ARSG Motors (fwd)

Chris,
     There is a performance and a major safety issue.  One, as your break 
rate increases your gap losses increase (as does the stress on your 
capacitor, which may or may not be able to withstand it).  Faster moving 
electrodes are better, but you have a minimum of 2 per disk, so if you have 
a disk spinning 12000 RPM, you will have a BPS of 400 (which is pretty good, 
depending on your individual coil), but your electrodes are moving at 250 
MPH at the tips (assuming a 7 inch electrode).  Basic physics tells us, that 
even a small mass at a velocity this high is experiencing very high forces 
(if I were board I would calculate it for you, but as it is, take my word 
for it, a tungsten rod could penetrate your body at this speed (depending on 
where it hit you) not to mention, completely destroy your gap)  it is much 
safer to run this gap at say 3000 RPM, and use 8 electrodes for 400 BPS, now 
your electrodes are only moving 62 MPH, which is much safer.  As for 
quenching concerns, if you are worried about it, (I wouldn't be) put in a 
series quenching gap.  To address your other point, yes a faster break rate 
makes more consistent sparks, and can increase spark length, but using more 
electrodes (8) you can get 800 BPS with 6000 RPM, this is plenty of breaks 
per second.  I suggest you peruse these two websites for detailed 
information about what I am trying to say, they will say it better than I 
can.
http://www.richieburnett.co.uk/async.html
http://www.tb3.com/tesla/sparkgaps/safety.html
Be safe, have fun.
Scott Bogard.


>From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: ARSG Motors (fwd)
>Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:15:20 -0600 (MDT)
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:39:45 -0500
>From: Crispy <crispy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: ARSG Motors (fwd)
>
>What is "too fast" for an ARSG?  Is it just power consumption, or is
>there another issue?  I may be wrong, but it seems to be that the faster
>the speed on the ARSG, the more frequent bangs, and the better old
>ionized trails help new sparks extend to new lengths by being allowed
>less time to dissipate.
>
>Chris
>
>On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 06:42 -0600, Tesla list wrote:
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:11:19 +0930
> > From: The Engine Centre <jetmac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: ARSG Motors (fwd)
> >
> > A washing machine, spin motor or a main motor, most are universal brush
> > motors,they are easy to get and cheap, i have one which runs 13000 no 
>load,
> > which is far too fast BUT  with a small variac you can control the speed 
>to
> > what ever you want.
> > Paul,--- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 12:34 PM
> > Subject: ARSG Motors (fwd)
> >
> >
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:51:14 -0500
> > > From: Crispy <crispy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: ARSG Motors
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Can anyone suggest reasonably fast (10000rpm+) and cheap motors for
> > > building a propeller-type ARSG?  I found some very cheap angle 
>grinders
> > > ($5 a piece, $15 shipping, 11000rpm) on ebay, but they use 600W, which
> > > is more than I can support.  The motor doesn't have to be that cheap
> > > either.  The imposed total limit is 800W, and the power supply will be 
>a
> > > 12/30 NST (360W).  Thanks a lot.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Tease your brain--play Clink! Win cool prizes! 
http://club.live.com/clink.aspx?icid=clink_hotmailtextlink2