[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: MMC Protection SGap current limit

Hi Sundog,

I just isn't that big of deal...  Even sundoggies need their sleep! ;-)) 

Just imagine the nice MMC needing to 'relax' that big o'l high voltage
charge because the main gap has gone to sleeeeeep...  The safety gap
quitely sneaks in and provides a current path to 'tuck in the covers' for
the MMC......  The current goes round and roouund and rooouunnndd the
primary inductor until the voltage is totally gone and all is totally calm.... 

Zzzzzzzzz... :-)

	terry


At 11:07 PM 05/15/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi all!
>        Mmmkay...just finished re-re-re-re-reading the below post
>by myself and the answer.  Thought about it a lot, and am still
>thinking.  Been up 2 days straight, so I'm just thinking and not
>coiling to see if the thoughts are right.  Here's what I thought so
>far...
>    Put an inductor, a spiral of wire (aka, an old primary),
>encased in a wooden/plastic/whatever box in series with your saftey
>gap, so the inductance limits the amperage of the spark gap.  Not a
>bad idea, but bulky, is another HV accident waiting to happen, etc.
>I guess a helix in a box would work, but the inductance on those
>are pretty low compared to the flat spiral (why?, I just know it
>is, but not why).   Mkay...so the cost of the copper tubing, wood,
>etc would outcost the resistor...why not just put the saftey gap in
>parallel with the main gap, so if it does fire for some reason,
>it'll perform the same function?  THen you have no need to try and
>limit the amperage across it, and the coil will be none the wiser.
>So I'm envisioning a nst with it's own saftey gap, the cap, the
>cap's saftey gap, the main gap, then the primary...sooner or later
>the saftey gap will fire, and the MMC's have shown they can take
>the abuse of overvoltages (unless you're *really* pushing it!), and
>the inductance limits your amp-pulse.  problem solved? dunno...but
>I believe if the saftey has to fire, put that puppy to work!
>                                        A very tired  Laters!
>                                                        Shad
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>Date: Sunday, May 14, 2000 11:39 PM
>Subject: Re: MMC Protection SGap current limit
>
>
>[snippers!]
>
>
>>> case, I like the idea of putting the saftey gap in parallel with
>>> the main gap, and set to fire a few KV higher...I'm assuming
>most
>>> of this deals with rotarys instead of static gaps, where missing
>a
>>> firing is more likely.  If firing the main gap, through the
>primary
>>> is safe, why not just coil a helix of tubing, say, 35-40 ft, in
>a
>>> box, seal it, and run that in series with your saftey gap
>instead
>>> of a resistor?  Definately cheaper, and should look identical to
>>> the caps as the primary you're already pushing (for the most
>part
>>> at least)....Just a my $.02.....
>>>                                                         Shad
>>
>>What's different is that the main gap has an inductor, namely the
>>primary coil in series with it. The surge impedance of the coil
>limits
>>the peak circuit current.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Malcolm
>>
>>
>>
>