Re: [TCML] Was Primary Grounding now RF gnd Center ball safety gap

[bartb <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Scot,

I've run in both configurations several years back. In my case, I had 
less primary strikes without a strike ring. But regarding floating or 
non-floating primaries, I haven't cased those. I however haven't noticed 
any problems running non-floated primaries, except when I "know" I 
caused the issue (poor tuning and moderate power). I also have to 
express that I've had days where my coil was not moved, not touched, 
etc.. One day, lots of primary strikes and a few days later, not a 
single primary strike.

There is another "safety gap" idea we could devise so that we won't care 
about primary strikes (thus eliminating worries of primary 
configurations or strike rings). The outer primary is most often hit 
(yes?). Run a wire down from the outer turn of the primary to a classic 
\/ configuration to RF ground, greater than the primary outer turn 
voltage, but a place where terminal strikes are forced to go. Performs 
the same situation as a strike ring without the strike ring near the 
primary. So, you still end up with the benefits of a strike ring but 
without the need of a strike ring.

Comments, criticism?
Bart

BunnyKiller wrote:
> Hey all...
>
> Been reading this thread and began to think about the primary strike 
> and grounded guard ring. Considering that the secondary is developing 
> in excess of 500KV on larger coils along with occasional strikes to 
> the primary, I can understand the failure of a primary circuit ( tank 
> capacitor) system, especially if the primary circuit has no available 
> grounding available in it.  I have had on my system, more than I would 
> like to have,  primary hits from the secondary...  BUT what is 
> coincidental, the center ball of my safety gap is grounded to the RF 
> ground. I did this in such a manner to help protect either side of the 
> piggies output from over voltage. If either side of the piggie does go 
> over voltage, it will arc to the center ball of the safety gap to RF 
> ground. I have no idea if this a feasible system, but it sure sounds 
> good in theory!
>
> Some of us on the list have a feeling that "grounded guard rings" 
> attracts the streamers towards the primary, thus increasing the 
> potential to hit the primary. I on the other hand feel that this isn't 
> true in all cases. I have run the BIGPIG system with and without the 
> "guard ring" and it seems to have the same number of "primary" 
> proximity hits either way. This may be due to the physical parameters 
> of my coil ( large toroid and semi short secondary)  predisposing the 
> EM field to "aim" the streamers toward the primary. But, when the 
> "guard ring" is active ( attached to RF ground), the strikes are 
> consistently to the ring instead of the primary.
>
> In retrospect, having an RF grounded center ball in the safety gap 
> seems to be able to allow voltage spikes from the secondary during a 
> primary hit to "safely" seek a path of "lower resistance" ( basically 
> through the air gap instead of the dielectric and oil of the cap) 
> instead of trying to produce a short in the cap and then through the 
> secondary of the hi volt supply to the hi volt transformers core or case.
> BTW the safety gap is parallel to the piggies output....
>
> For those of you more inclined towards  Electrical Engineering  
> applications with the real experience, I would like to know if my 
> application of the RF grounded safety gap center ball is actually 
> doing what I think it should be accomplishing.
>
> Scot D
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla