[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: vacuum spark gap
I was thinking that a vacuum gap would be the most responsive (and possibly
the most efficient?) . I don't really see any meaningful difference in the
effort it would take to make a high vacuum sealed gap and a pressurized gas
gap.
> Original Poster: "Robert Jones" <alwynj48-at-earthlink-dot-net>
>
> Hi,
>
> I can think of much more fun things to do with your vacuum pump than a
> vacuum gap.
> Is there some reason you want a vacuum gap and not a gas gap.
>
> Regards Bob
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: 29 April 2000 19:32
> Subject: vacuum spark gap
> >Original Poster: "Alfred C. Erpel" <aerpel-at-pil-dot-net>
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> > I am going to build a vacuum spark gap. I have a vacuum pump capable
of
> >10^-4 torr. I have all the machine shop equipment, vacuum grade grease
etc.
> to
> >do this properly. It will need to switch less than 500 watts.
> > What non-mechanical issues might there be? X-ray concerns or any
other
> type
> >of radiation? What percentage of energy might be expected to be absorbed
by
> the
> >gap and/or radiated? What is the dielectric strength of a 10^-4 torr
> vacuum?
> >
> >Regards,
> >Alfred Erpel
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>