Re: SRSG BPS

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>

In a message dated 3/19/02 10:14:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:

Greg,

I agree with your analyses below.  Folks in the US have had
good results with both 120 and 240 bps.  In the UK, folks have
had a lot of trouble preventing the "gas-burner" effect at 100 bps.
It's harder to get the sparks to coalesce into a single, or a few
streamers at 100 bps than at 200 bps.  In my tests, I found
considerably better "efficiency" at 120 bps than at 240 bps.
I'm not sure if it was due to a pecularity of my system. 

Cheers,
John


>
> Hey all,
>
> I've decided to give making a synchronous gap a go, as I want to 
> directly compare the performance with an ARSG. I'm wondering what BPS 
> set up is the best to use. The way I see it, to take full avantage of a 
> synchronous gap, a 100 BPS gap is the go (for the aussie 50Hz power 
> supply) to allow charging at only the highs and lows of the AC 
> sinewave. If you increase the break rate above, say, 200 to 400 BPS, 
> you are essentially losing the advantage that synchronous operation 
> gives, and I would think you might as well use an asynchronous gap at 
> these speeds (though an asynchronous gap won't work so well below 
> 300BPS). However, with the higher BPS you can get by with smaller 
> capacitance in the primary circuit. Alot of people seem to compromise 
> by using a 200BPS (or 240BPS for you in the US) gap. I'm wondering how 
> the 200BPS and 100BPS versions compare in practice. 
>