Re: [TCML] Spark gap

["huil888" <huil888@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Henry -

This sounds plausible, but do you have any actual data (scope waveforms, 
etc) that would support the claim of better quenching  from a  "propeller 
gap" vs a conventional static spark gap?

The data would have to be generated from a test setup where the only 
variable was the substitution of the two different types of gaps.

If you have data, could you share it with the List?

Regards,
Scott Hanson


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Henry Hallam" <hallam@xxxxxxx>
To: "Tesla Coil Mailing List" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: [TCML] Spark gap


> Among other things, the propeller gap is better at quenching (shutting off 
> the spark), especially at high power.
>
> Henry
>
>
> Rich Schmuke wrote:
> > I am going to ask a simple question but please give a simple answer. I am
> > not a EE just a builder. I was asking about a rotor gap the other day and 
> > it
> > was suggested I try a propeller gap for my 200ma coil. Well I have a 
> > motor
> > from a 8" hard drive now and am going to build a mount as soon as it is 
> > warm
> > enough to get to my shed. My question is why is a propeller at 3600 RPM
> > better than a RQ copper tube gap?  60 cycle RQ  vs a 3600RPM it's the 
> > same
> > break rate I think.
> >
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tesla mailing list
> > Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla

_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla