Re: S.S.T.C. "booster"--expert opinions wanted...

["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 3/28/02 8:25:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:

Ken, all,

I think the spark length that's produced by a given input power
depends largely on the pulse duration, pulse rate, and toroid
energy storage.  (Of course there must be enough voltage to 
break out of the toroid.)

I suspect that the 5mS of power that you feed to the system
after breakout is mostly wasted as far as increasing the
spark length is concerned.  I think this power simply brightens
the spark.  It may be feeding the system at an incorrect
impedance.  I would suggest making the pulses much shorter,
by eliminating most of the 5mS of power feed.  Then this 
energy should be used instead to increase the pulse rate.
I think the pulse rate you're using of 16 pulses per second (?)
is much too slow to produce long sparks.  IMO, you need at least
60 PPS, and preferably 120 PPS or so.  These are the kinds of CW
experiments I'd like to do, but never seem to get around to doing.

Cheers,
John


>
> I have also offered here my opinion as to the reason that s.s.t.c. sparks are
> shorter than ordinary t.c. sparks.  Given the same input power,  a spark-gap
> primary-drive delivers a very much higher initial primary current than can a
> s.s. drive, as is well known.  The resultant flux drives the top electrode's
> voltage much more rapidly toward, and in fact, I contend, considerably past,
> the normal break-out potential before spark break-out can significantly
> occur. 
> Considerably-past because any spark break-out is very slightly slowed by the
> necessity to heat the surrounding air: that's what causes the "delay" spoken
> of
> by others.
>
> A high rate-of-rise will tend to "win a race" against that delay, thus
> allowing
> for additional voltage build-up on the electrode and causing the spark length
> to increase.