Thanks much, the reason for the question was the system in question is the
one I just built with 54nf and it works great, but thought "could be
better". With the wealth of info on this list, its hard to leave the
computer for the lab. So many many different things to try, the more I
learn, the more there is to learn and I love it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gary Lau
Sent: September 27, 2020 8:29 PM
To: Tesla Coil Mailing List
Subject: Re: [TCML] Is this still correct, javatc
Assuming you have 60Hz power, for a 15/120 NST power source, a .031uF cap
is correct if you are using a static gap, but for a SRSG, you need a much
larger value. I think .055uF is about right. There is great danger if you
use too small a cap with a SRSG, it will charge to a voltage far in excess
of the NST rating, endangering both the NST and cap. I can't
emphasize this too strongly - having a PROPERLY SET safety gap in parallel
with the SRSG is mandatory. If your safety gap insists on firing, it may
mean that your cap isn't large enough (resonance issues aside).
Regards, Gary Lau
MA, USA
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 8:00 PM shaun <snoggle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> With javatc I noticed that it recommend a 55nf primary cap for use in a
> srsg, 4 neon 15000/30 system. But after loads of reading I have not seen
> any
> one actually use this value or even close to this. Seems most say .031 or
> something close. Is javatc recommendation of 55nf alright to use or just a
> ball park. Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla