Re: The MTSG Metlicka Triggered Gap... (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: List moderator <mod1@xxxxxxxxxx>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 17:27:26 -0700
From: Jim Lux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>, tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: The MTSG Metlicka Triggered Gap... (fwd)

At 04:13 PM 5/14/2007, Tesla list wrote:

> > However, for a TSG to replace an RSG? I don't think
> > so. The TSG falls
> > under the same power issues of any static gap.
> >
> > Take care,
> > Bart
>
>Thank you for the elaborate response.  Also, I'd like
>to thank John Freau for his excellent reply as well.
>
>In other words at high power levels, proper quenching
>is just as difficult (or nearly so) to achieve as any
>static gap.  So the larger gap spacing and fan wasn't
>sufficient (in your tests) to provide equal quenching
>as the SRSG?

I'm not sure this is actually the case.  Folks like Erwin Marx built 
triggered gaps handling tens of kilowatts. Fruengel talks about 
triggered gaps with rep rates in the tens of kHz range and average 
powers in the kilowatts, too.  I suspect that the mechanical 
complexities of a high performance triggered gap might be more than a 
rotary gap (which after all, is a pretty simple device) coupled with 
the need for some more sophisticated trigger electronics. You'd need 
to deal with air handling, cooling, electrode erosion, etc. It might 
just be that the SRSG is easier for a given performance level, and if 
you are going to buy into increased complexity, folks might go to 
various solid state coils.

The spark gap coils have a big advantage in that they can have very, 
very high peak powers without much trouble.  That 20 kW coil running 
at 200 bps is dumping 100 Joules/bang, and if it does it in a couple 
or 3 tens of microseconds, that's a pretty high peak power (several 
megawatts).  What's the peak power being run in a SS coil these days?

Jim Lux