Re: More real experiments

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: More real experiments
From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 10:04:20 -0800
Tesla List wrote:
> 
> > Subject: More real experiments
> 
> >From harris-at-parkave-dot-netThu Nov 14 22:37:31 1996
> Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 13:09:10 -0400
> From: Ed Harris <harris-at-parkave-dot-net>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: More real experiments
> 
>     [The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set]
>     [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
>     [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
> 
> >
> > From hullr-at-whitlock-dot-comTue Nov 12 22:35:46 1996
> > Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 16:45:50 -0800
> > From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
> > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > Subject: More real experiments
> >
> [snip]
> 
> Hi Richard,
> 
> > This showed up as the max voltage across the non-firing gap.  Firings at
> > the gap showed a rather immediate fall to ~200 volts.  The  current
> > transformer indicated a peak current in the system at this point of ~80
> > amps.  Thus under the optimal conditions the gap had a lowest possible
> > resisitance of 2.5 ohms. (The gaps were hardly making any noise!) For the
> 
> > instant of max turn on, the gap consumed 16,000 watts of peak energy.
> > The peak tank energy in our little 15VA system would have been on the
> > order of 160,000 watts. based on a 2KV firing point and 80 amp tank
> > current.  10% losses figured this way.
> >
> 
> I'm particularly interested in your V-gap versus I-primary measurements.
> Unless I'm mistaken, these agree with what Malcolm has also seen....
> Measurements on DC plasma arcs have similar behavior in the sense that the
> gap voltge is relatively independent of current, but I'm not sure what time
> constants might be involved. To wit:
> 
>  Is your time resolution good enough to see how the V-g follows I-P when
> I-p is near zero ( as in a zero-crossing point)? If your scope can do a
> waveform multiplication, can it also do a waveform division to deterimine
> R-gap as a function of time ? Boy I'd really like to see that. What do you
> think?
> 
> -Ed Harris
> 
> ps
> look Chip, no philosophical disseration

Ed,

I'll redo the experiment this weekend if time permits and shoot for a 
specific resistance vs. time result.  I left the setup intact so it will 
just be a matter of crankin' it up again.


Richard Hull, TCBOR