Re: nonresonant cap = imcomplete charge ?

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

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

In a message dated 10/21/02 10:53:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:

-- snip  --


>
> Static LTR = Static gap Larger Than Resonant.  These caps not only charge
> the cap to voltage but also suck extra energy from the NST secondary stored
> as current in the output inductance.  These are very safe in that the
> voltage cannot go higher than the NST is designed for.  The value is pi/2
> that of the resonant case.




Terry,

I thought the static gap with LTR cap was a safe design because the fixed
setting of the gap width prevented the voltage from reaching damaging high
values.  If the gap width is set too wide, the NST will be destroyed.  -  Just
trying to add some clarification.

Ed Sonderman


>
> Sync Gap LTR = Same as above but with sync gaps you can play timing tricks
> to get full voltage on a cap that is pi times the size of the resonant cap.
> These are about the most powerful systems of all.  There is a chart of all
> this at:
>
> http://hot-streamer-dot-com/temp/MMCcapSales.gif
>
> Also see details at Richie's site:
>
> http://www.richieburnett.co.uk/tesla.shtml
>
> Cheers,
>
>     Terry