[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Fw: Arc Impedance Study - Computer Models
Hi John,
> Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com
>
> In a message dated 98-10-13 01:43:50 EDT, you write:
>
> << > I run a large cap small Lp coil on quite modest primary
> > voltages with a single static and get sterling performance with no
> > gap cooling, airflow etc. However, running with a small cap and the
> > same leakage-L limited transformer, the same gap does not do the job
> > and requires the extras to perform. Anyone else found this? Resonant
> > charging systems in particular seem to perform well with the simpler
> > gaps.
> >
> > Observations invited,
> > Malcolm
> > >>
>
> Malcolm, all,
>
> This is very interesting. One would think that the smaller cap would
> allow for easier quenching, unless the faster firing repetition is keeping
> the gaps too hot (?) Using resonant charging, the gap firing will occur
> when the mains are at a low voltage, this may help prevent some sort
> of power arcing conditions? But then again, quench doesn't matter
> much. I think I've seen the same effects you
> noted, but my experiments weren't well controlled. I suspect that
> when the cap is too small, it does a poor job of exciting the TC, it's
> like trying to break a rock by striking it with a toothpick, instead of
> a sledgehammer. Does this seem reasonable in any way?
>
> John Freau
Just wondering how much of a part the "stiffness" of the charging
source has to play when used with caps of different sizes. It does
appear to have some influence. The suggestion is that for a given
charging source impedance, the gap is harder to put out if a small
primary cap is used compared with a large one. Anyone else found this?
Cheers,
Malcolm