Phil Tuck wrote:
The suction will not have a great impact. The suction does more to stabilize the electrode heating more than it does to change the voltage at conduction. The voltage change due to air (regardless of how it is done) is a matter of preventing a hot spot. If a hot-spot occurs, the voltage at the area will decrease, and so will the spark lengths. Keeping the gap electrodes temperature stable is the key to high power performance in a static gap (regardless of type). Stable temps allow stable voltages = stable bang energies = stable spark lengths. If something gets hot enough to change the breakdown voltage, in the end, spark lengths suffer.I was wrongly thinking that the only discrepancy would be caused by the surface area being wrong because of the central hole, and I had overlooked the 'radius of curvature' issue (a little work on the lathe will soon correct this). This of course will also upset things as you point out. Ialso realise the suction will cause breakdown voltage to alter as well.
Yes, this method will work fine. I sort of like your train of thought with this method as it ensures the safety gap is set for protection. A rather "smart" method in setting the main gap.The safety gap was setup correctly initially (& checked since) so the voltage across the NST should not exceed safety limits. So as long as I don't alter that setting, in theory I can open the main gap up until the safety fires and then back the gap off a bit at a time until I achieve a balance where the coils output hopefully tells me the cap is still managing to charge up to 100%, while the safety is not firing
Take care, Bart _______________________________________________ Tesla mailing list Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla