Re: [TCML] RE: Need assistance in diagnosing poor performance

["Chris Swinson" <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gary,

Yes point taken, Static gap will be more consistent than a RSG. We don't 
know enough about Steve's design, As he seems to having tuning issues that 
is what I concentrated my reply on. Steve could of course have any number of 
problems which maybe nothing to do with tuning.

Chris




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>
To: "Tesla Coil Mailing List" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 6:01 PM
Subject: RE: [TCML] RE: Need assistance in diagnosing poor performance


I disagree with a couple of the points made below.

In comparing operation between static and SRSG's, the bang size with a 
static gap is actually more consistent with varying mains voltage, as the 
gap breakdown voltage is governed by the gap geometry and is not 
significantly affected by mains voltage.  In a rotary gap, the bang size is 
directly related to mains voltage.  Bang RATE is certainly more constant 
with a SRSG.  But for both gaps types, streamer power and length (and 
secondary detuning) will BOTH equally be a function of input voltage.

If the goal is to keep things simple, a static gap seems more in line.  My 
static gaps all worked right off, but it took me several attempts and a 
couple years before I got SRSG's right.  Tweaking the phase and getting the 
cap size optimized was not trivial and definitely more complex that using a 
static gap.

I agree that streamers can significantly affect tuning, but as Steve's 
streamers are only 3" at this point, I don't think it is at all significant.

Regards, Gary Lau
MA, USA


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