Re: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)

[otmaskin5@xxxxxxx]

Thanks Jim for the correction.? I was just using a shorthand description for brevity & clarity since I have often heard of multi-segmented pipe gaps referred to as Richard Quick type (rightly or wrongly).? In contrast?to your view that a single?gap has superior quenching?capability,?seems there's' a fairly broad consensus among the group on this list that a multi-segmented gap actually quenches more effectively than a single gap.? I'm a novice without any real electrical background, so I'm listening & asking a lot more than giving my opinion on this stuff.? 

I am very interested in the hyperbaric gap you describe and will probably build one in the near future.? At this point I'm just trying to better understand the science behind the performance differences between types of gaps.? I do appreciate your thoughts and thank you for the response.? Regards, Dennis Hopkinton MA

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Mora <wavetuner@xxxxxxxxx>
To: 'Tesla Coil Mailing List' <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 9:44 pm
Subject: RE: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)



Hi Dennis,

Please stand corrected on the Gap construction. The multi-segment called a
Richard Quick design is a misnomer as it was invented by Richard Hull's
Group. Richard Quick did invent a single Hyperbaric gap which I have used
with great success with (2)15/60 neon transformers. Its way down in the
achieves and has gifs.

I have never been able to make a decent multi segment copper pipe gap with
several, sincere attemps. A single hyperbaric gap the air is adjusted to
quench the gap as near as possible to first transfer of energy into the
secondary rather than allowing sloshing back and forth which is a big loss
factor as in a poorly quenched multigap. I just disassembled my multigap for
the brass screws and noticed the gross arced out gap surfaces. Heat, light,
misalignment all add to energy loss. A single gap is easy to make, to clean,
and adjust. Your mileage may vary. It rocked for me!

Jim Mora




-----Original Message-----
From: tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of otmaskin5@xxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 5:53 PM
To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [TCML] Spark gaps (again)

I've been following earlier discussions about higher losses associated with
multi-segmented?spark gaps (i.e., Richard Quick type) compared to a?single
gap.? It's clear that the experience of this group has been power losses are
significantly less with?a single gap style with adequate airflow.? But I'm
not sure I caught why that is.? What is the reason that a 0.27" single gap
loses less power than an 9-gap / 10 pipe RQ gap that has total gap size of
0.27"?? If total gap spacing is the same for both, why would one be more
lossy than the other?

One other question, has anyone experimented with a RQ style using only 2
parallel pipes for a single gap???If so, what were the results.? With good
air flow, it seems this set up?would be good for keeping the gap cool
considering airflow goes between, around and through the pipes.? And you
could make the pipes longer, say 4 to 5?inches for better heat sin
king
ability.? 

Sorry to take everyone back to an old topic, but I've been away for a
while.? Thanks, Dennis Hopkinton MA
_______________________________________________
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