Re: Safety gaps destroyed my Neon ?

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Safety gaps destroyed my Neon ?
• From: "Robert W. Stephens" <rwstephens-at-hurontario-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
• Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 15:53:42 -0600
• Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
• Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

Tesla List wrote:
> 
> Original Poster: "Reinhard Walter Buchner" <rw.buchner-at-verbund-dot-net>
> 
> Hi Robert,
> 
> > I have been arguing against using a grounded center tapped NST safety
> > gap for years because I feel this is asking for trouble as you pointed
> > out. You just cannot guarantee that both gaps will light
> >simultaneously to stop the voltage surge with such a gap system.
> >One half going into the conductive state might well reduce the overall
> >surge sufficiently to prevent the second from lighting at all.  At the
> >same time, a healthy surge then becomes directed to where it can do
> >damage.  Just my opinion.
> 
> Iīm not sure I can agree with you here. If you use a 2 piece SSG (esp
> on center tapped xformers) you can still raise one side of the xformer
> to dangerous voltage levels (and the 2 piece gap wonīt fire) AND this
> SSG is nothing more than a second main gap. The voltage is not bled
> off to a ground (zero volts) potential. In other words, the current will
> be forced through the tank circuit once again. If there is *any* high
> frequency superimposed on top of this voltage AND you are using
> any kind of filter, you will have to force all this through the filter
> in the *wrong* direction. This may or may not work (the time
> necessary, will become a problem). In any case, you will have RF
> floating (at some undefined potential) around the xformer, which
> is not instantly bled off. Personally I think a 3 piece SSG alone
> is good enough. I donīt use any other filters, etc. I have not lost
> a NST yet (and my SSG has fired lots of times). The 3 piece
> SSG will bleed of any overly excited electrons (read: overvolting)
> to a pretty firm zero potential. If only one half of the gap fires,
> then obviously, the circuit has a raised potential only on one side.
> The gap will clamp the voltage down to a safe potential. If the
> surge is not clamped hard enough, the second gap should cut
> in and save the other side of the transformer.
> 
> Coiler  greets from germany,
> Reinhard

Reinhart,

Well then, I guess we each have a different opinion on this matter. Your
argument is compelling, but I am not swayed in my own opinion.  I will
continue to successfully employ a single, non-center tap referenced
safety gap on my NST type systems.

Robert W. Stephens

• Prev: Re: Resonant Frequency
• Next: Re: More: 120 bps vs. 240 bps comparison tests
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread