Re: srsg idea to prevent losses

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

Original poster: "Jim Lux by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net>

You'd also better have a pretty big motor and a way to cool the oil, since
what you are basically making is a dynamometer load...

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "Loudner, Godfrey by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <gloudner-at-SINTE.EDU>
> 
> Hello Terry
> 
> The brushing electrode would create a tunnel behind itself as it moved in
> the oil. It could be a problem if the tunnel did not refill with oil before
> the arrival of the next brushing electrode. Also the turbulence created by
> the brushing electrodes might interfere with the refilling of the tunnels
> with oil. I'm no expert in fluid dynamics.
> 
> Godfrey Loudner
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tesla list [SMTP:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 12:22 AM
> > To:   tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > Subject:      RE: srsg idea to prevent losses
> >
> > Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
> >
> > Hi Gary,
> >
> > Both of my coils have just about zero quenching :-))  They conduct until
> > the current is just gone...  The big coil does loose a little due to
> > primary to secondary "sloshing" but the small coil is designed to expend
> > all of it's power to the streamer during the first notch.  There is
> > nothing
> > left to slosh back to the primary.  It has lower Q and all to do that,but
> > it seems to work very well.  Solid state spark gaps can provide "perfect"
> > switching too like the proposed contact gap.  Of course,they can also open
> > back up to microsecond accuracy...
> >
> > The idea of submersing a contact type gap in oil is intriguing.  Maybe
> > putting it all in on heck of a vacuum too...  But the heat dissipation in
> > the gap and motor would be about zero in a vacuum...
> >
> > Much to ponder...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >       Terry
> >
> >
> > At 03:42 PM 3/20/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Actually, it IS necessary to have a spark as the conductor in a spark
> > gap.
> > >It has to do with quenching, or when the gap stops conducting.  In a
> > spark
> > >gap, conduction ceases at one of the primary notches, when all of the
> > >primary energy has been transferred to the secondary side.  A spark
> > "knows"
> > >when to stop conducting by virtue of the gap current, when it reaches a
> > >minimum.  A mechanical contact's on-duration is dictated strictly by the
> > >mechanics of the design and it would be nearly impossible to design it so
> >
> > >that the switch opens with microsecond accuracy just at a primary notch.
> > If
> > >the on-time was too long, the energy would slosh back and forth between
> > the
> > >primary and secondary, wasting energy in the gap and other loss
> > mechanisms.
> > >
> > >Of course, the fact that the contacts will arc in the "normal" fashion
> > well
> > >in advance of mechanical closure means that the above is purely academic.
> >
> > >Also, rotary contacts spinning at 1800 or 3600 RPM with zero clearance
> > >between them will guarantee an electrode crash.
> > >
> > >Regards, Gary Lau
> > >MA, USA
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >From:        Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
> > >Sent:        Wednesday, March 20, 2002 2:55 PM
> > >To:  tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > >Subject:     Re: srsg idea to prevent losses
> > >
> > >Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
> > >
> > >Hi Colin,
> > >
> > >Since the voltage across the gaps is high, they will tend to arc over
msnip...