"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
.. .
I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i

Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!

"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
news:xIu5f.2954

Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we
could go back and slap Cliff's mother!

all we need is connect them in parallel and in series (say, series of
two blocks of 6 franceformers in series in each block), and we can go
back in time indeed...

I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.

i

Chicken****!

Tom Gardner wrote:
"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
.. .

I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i


Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!

Give me a shout if you're got a spare seat in the time machine. That
would be one worthwhile trip.

Chris

I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:36:28 -0700, the renowned BillP
wrote:

I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill

That sounds entirely normal. Once the arc forms, the voltage across
the gap drops below the ignition voltage at the bottom of the gap.

An oil ignition transformer might do better because it's a "stiffer"
power source- a neon sign transformer is more like a constant-current
source due to the internal magnetic shunt. A more intense arc will
also rise more quickly (due to more heating of the air), but you could
smoke the transformer.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

In article 4uv5f.11737$MN6.9839@fed1read04, BillP
wrote:

I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill


Sounds like normal operation to me... I've never seen a jacob's ladder
that did more than one spark at a time, and suspect that such a beast
doesn't exist, due to a basic electrical fact:
For *GENERAL PURPOSES*, electricity will follow the single path of least
resistance.

Yes, things get a bit more complicated when you start playing with the
concept of resistances in parallel, and similar circuit networks, but on
the level that you're talking about when speaking of a Jacob's ladder,
you can figure that the juice is going to be taking the one path of
minimum resistance (the currently active arc) at all times. Only when
the current arc quenches will there be a "better, lower resistance path"
for the current to take.

This is the same reason that the so-called "splitfire" and similar
multi-gap spark plugs are nothing more than a gimmick to get you to
spend money - Sure, the plug has 2, 3, 4, or more elctrodes for spark to
jump to. But for any given firing of that plug, only of the gaps will
actually be jumped to form a spark. "Ringing" in the ignition circuit
might cause a spark on one set of electrodes, followed by another spark
across a different set of electrodes, possibly several times per "actual
firing", but these multiple sparks will always happen sequentially - one
spark will happen, then die out, and then another one will happen - but
multiple gaps won't fire simultaneously, regardless of how much "oomph"
you put into the equation. (although visually, they might appear to be
firing simultaneously due to the speed at which things happen, the
proper gear will easily detect that the discharges as coming one after
another, rather than "stacked" all at once)

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details.

Don Bruder wrote:
In article 4uv5f.11737$MN6.9839@fed1read04, BillP
wrote:


I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill



Sounds like normal operation to me... I've never seen a jacob's ladder
that did more than one spark at a time, and suspect that such a beast
doesn't exist, due to a basic electrical fact:
For *GENERAL PURPOSES*, electricity will follow the single path of least
resistance.

Yes, things get a bit more complicated when you start playing with the
concept of resistances in parallel, and similar circuit networks, but on
the level that you're talking about when speaking of a Jacob's ladder,
you can figure that the juice is going to be taking the one path of
minimum resistance (the currently active arc) at all times. Only when
the current arc quenches will there be a "better, lower resistance path"
for the current to take.

This is the same reason that the so-called "splitfire" and similar
multi-gap spark plugs are nothing more than a gimmick to get you to
spend money - Sure, the plug has 2, 3, 4, or more elctrodes for spark to
jump to. But for any given firing of that plug, only of the gaps will
actually be jumped to form a spark. "Ringing" in the ignition circuit
might cause a spark on one set of electrodes, followed by another spark
across a different set of electrodes, possibly several times per "actual
firing", but these multiple sparks will always happen sequentially - one
spark will happen, then die out, and then another one will happen - but
multiple gaps won't fire simultaneously, regardless of how much "oomph"
you put into the equation. (although visually, they might appear to be
firing simultaneously due to the speed at which things happen, the
proper gear will easily detect that the discharges as coming one after
another, rather than "stacked" all at once)

As you said, for general purposes.

I'm not convinced that a multi-gap plug couldn't fire
more than one electrode at a time. The electricity
doesn't know or care about how many electrodes are
present. All it cares about is whether its potential
is great enough to jump the gap. If you have an ignition
coil with lots of series resistance then yes, the gap
of least resistance will fire, the voltage will drop
because of the current draw, and the other gaps will
not fire.

On the other hand, if you have a good stiff coil that
can deliver lots of current along with the voltage,
then as the voltage rises, the gap of least resistance
fires, the voltage continues to rise and the gap
of next least resistance will fire and so on. As long
as the coil can deliver enough energy to keep the voltage
rising as the gaps fire, you can have multiple sparks.

In article ,
Jim Stewart wrote:

Don Bruder wrote:
In article 4uv5f.11737$MN6.9839@fed1read04, BillP
wrote:


I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill



Sounds like normal operation to me... I've never seen a jacob's ladder
that did more than one spark at a time, and suspect that such a beast
doesn't exist, due to a basic electrical fact:
For *GENERAL PURPOSES*, electricity will follow the single path of least
resistance.

Yes, things get a bit more complicated when you start playing with the
concept of resistances in parallel, and similar circuit networks, but on
the level that you're talking about when speaking of a Jacob's ladder,
you can figure that the juice is going to be taking the one path of
minimum resistance (the currently active arc) at all times. Only when
the current arc quenches will there be a "better, lower resistance path"
for the current to take.

This is the same reason that the so-called "splitfire" and similar
multi-gap spark plugs are nothing more than a gimmick to get you to
spend money - Sure, the plug has 2, 3, 4, or more elctrodes for spark to
jump to. But for any given firing of that plug, only of the gaps will
actually be jumped to form a spark. "Ringing" in the ignition circuit
might cause a spark on one set of electrodes, followed by another spark
across a different set of electrodes, possibly several times per "actual
firing", but these multiple sparks will always happen sequentially - one
spark will happen, then die out, and then another one will happen - but
multiple gaps won't fire simultaneously, regardless of how much "oomph"
you put into the equation. (although visually, they might appear to be
firing simultaneously due to the speed at which things happen, the
proper gear will easily detect that the discharges as coming one after
another, rather than "stacked" all at once)

As you said, for general purposes.

I'm not convinced that a multi-gap plug couldn't fire
more than one electrode at a time. The electricity
doesn't know or care about how many electrodes are
present. All it cares about is whether its potential
is great enough to jump the gap. If you have an ignition
coil with lots of series resistance then yes, the gap
of least resistance will fire, the voltage will drop
because of the current draw, and the other gaps will
not fire.

On the other hand, if you have a good stiff coil that
can deliver lots of current along with the voltage,
then as the voltage rises, the gap of least resistance
fires, the voltage continues to rise and the gap
of next least resistance will fire and so on. As long
as the coil can deliver enough energy to keep the voltage
rising as the gaps fire, you can have multiple sparks.

Trouble is, while the voltage is rising to fire "the next gap", the
initial spark is, from an electrical standpoint, behaving as a
dead-short, which is going to keep the voltage from making it to the
point where gap #2 (or later) would fire. Assuming for the moment that
your scenario would work, there's a further complication: If a second
spark were to form, it would be due to the fact that the resistance at
the gap that second spark is jumping is lower than the resistance of the
already active spark, which would "shut off" the first spark, which
takes us right back to the "one path of least resistance" concept.

You're correct that the juice doesn't care what the 'trode-count is. It
cares about one thing, and one thing only: Where is the least
resistance? Once that least resistance is found, the juice tends to keep
flowing through it, rather than seeking a new path. The only thing that
would stop this behavior is if you were to introduce another,
lower-resistance, path for the next spark to jump across. Otherwise, the
(effective) dead-short of the first spark just keeps sucking up the
output from the coil, and you get a single spark (plus or minus anything
that comes from the circuit ringing, which, as mentioned before, will be
sequential, rather than simultaneous, although it might *APPEAR* as if
"all four gaps fired at once" due to the comparative slowness of your
ability to perceive such rapidly occurring events) per firing of the
plug.

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details.

"Jim Stewart" wrote in message
...
On the other hand, if you have a good stiff coil that
can deliver lots of current along with the voltage,
then as the voltage rises, the gap of least resistance
fires, the voltage continues to rise and the gap
of next least resistance will fire and so on. As long
as the coil can deliver enough energy to keep the voltage
rising as the gaps fire, you can have multiple sparks.

That'd be a pretty "stiff" coil. The resistance of that plasma stream is
darn low. I'm probably talking out of school right now, but can't remember
a 30KV spark coil of any design (for engines) that had a secondary
resistance lower than a Kohm, or so -- even so-called "high performance"
coils.

At 1K, the resistance of the arc would be 'significantly low' compared to
the total impedance of the system.

Also, I can't remember seeing a situation where the voltage increased
significantly across an established, fixed-length arc. IIRC, upping the
current just makes the plasma stream thicker, and lowers its resistance
further.

LLoyd

In article ,
Ignoramus27736 wrote:

I have a practical question regarding testing of these transformers.

Can I use regular wire to conduct 9 kV, provided that wires are
separated by large distance. (say never below 2 inches except at
terminals).

Can I use regular ring terminals to attach wires to the transformer,
provided that their cable ends poin in the opposite directions?

Yes, and yes.

Just beware... The insulation thickness on "conventional" wire may not
be (probably isn't) thick enough to prevent the thing from arcing to YOU
if you make contact (accidentally or otherwise) with that "insulated"
wire while the juice is on.

Thus speaks a voice of experience. My "bite" came from an oil-furnace
ignitor, nameplated at 6000 volts and 35mA, and it got me through a
solidly insulated wire I was using when I brushed up against it while it
was hot.

(Note to thrillseekers: Taking 3Kv to the "funnybone" will give you a
thrill you won't soon forget - Unless, of course, you knock yourself
stupid with the self-inflicted back-of-wrist-to-the-forehead blow that
results from having your bicep clench up so hard and fast that it snaps
your arm up like your hand was shot out of a cannon...)

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details.

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 13:53:30 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:36:28 -0700, the renowned BillP
wrote:

I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill

That sounds entirely normal. Once the arc forms, the voltage across
the gap drops below the ignition voltage at the bottom of the gap.

An oil ignition transformer might do better because it's a "stiffer"
power source- a neon sign transformer is more like a constant-current
source due to the internal magnetic shunt. A more intense arc will
also rise more quickly (due to more heating of the air), but you could
smoke the transformer.

Nope. Oil ignition xfmrs are very similar to neon xfmrs. Further,
air is air. It might take 20KV to initiate a spark, but it only
takes about 1000 volts to maintain the resulting 30 mA or so arc.
That arc will rise until the length gets to where the power is
dispersed over a long enough distance that it can't keep it hot -- or
it just "blows out". Then another spark initiates another arc at the
bottom.

Don Bruder wrote:
In article ,
Jim Stewart wrote:


Don Bruder wrote:

In article 4uv5f.11737$MN6.9839@fed1read04, BillP
wrote:



I will actually try the Jacobs' ladder.



I had a huge industrial rated Neon Ballast Txformer some years ago...
about a foot long and some 10" per side. Weighed about 40# or so.
Using welding rod I made an "S" bend in 2 pieces of brazing rod and
attached them to the output in an attempt to make a Jacobs Ladder.
Only had limited success ~ The gap between the wires, when close enuff,
would start the arc. Only problem is that the arc would rise to the top
of the ladder and WOULD NOT start another "rung" on the ladder until the
top "rung" reached the top and terminated. Only then would another rung
start..
I tried narrowing the "V" of the ladder and the narrowest part of the
gap and all sorts of combinations, but could never get more than one
rung at a time.... Not a good ladder!

Any suggestions as to why this was happening.

Bill



Sounds like normal operation to me... I've never seen a jacob's ladder
that did more than one spark at a time, and suspect that such a beast
doesn't exist, due to a basic electrical fact:
For *GENERAL PURPOSES*, electricity will follow the single path of least
resistance.

Yes, things get a bit more complicated when you start playing with the
concept of resistances in parallel, and similar circuit networks, but on
the level that you're talking about when speaking of a Jacob's ladder,
you can figure that the juice is going to be taking the one path of
minimum resistance (the currently active arc) at all times. Only when
the current arc quenches will there be a "better, lower resistance path"
for the current to take.

This is the same reason that the so-called "splitfire" and similar
multi-gap spark plugs are nothing more than a gimmick to get you to
spend money - Sure, the plug has 2, 3, 4, or more elctrodes for spark to
jump to. But for any given firing of that plug, only of the gaps will
actually be jumped to form a spark. "Ringing" in the ignition circuit
might cause a spark on one set of electrodes, followed by another spark
across a different set of electrodes, possibly several times per "actual
firing", but these multiple sparks will always happen sequentially - one
spark will happen, then die out, and then another one will happen - but
multiple gaps won't fire simultaneously, regardless of how much "oomph"
you put into the equation. (although visually, they might appear to be
firing simultaneously due to the speed at which things happen, the
proper gear will easily detect that the discharges as coming one after
another, rather than "stacked" all at once)

As you said, for general purposes.

I'm not convinced that a multi-gap plug couldn't fire
more than one electrode at a time. The electricity
doesn't know or care about how many electrodes are
present. All it cares about is whether its potential
is great enough to jump the gap. If you have an ignition
coil with lots of series resistance then yes, the gap
of least resistance will fire, the voltage will drop
because of the current draw, and the other gaps will
not fire.

On the other hand, if you have a good stiff coil that
can deliver lots of current along with the voltage,
then as the voltage rises, the gap of least resistance
fires, the voltage continues to rise and the gap
of next least resistance will fire and so on. As long
as the coil can deliver enough energy to keep the voltage
rising as the gaps fire, you can have multiple sparks.


Trouble is, while the voltage is rising to fire "the next gap", the
initial spark is, from an electrical standpoint, behaving as a
dead-short, which is going to keep the voltage from making it to the
point where gap #2 (or later) would fire. Assuming for the moment that
your scenario would work, there's a further complication: If a second
spark were to form, it would be due to the fact that the resistance at
the gap that second spark is jumping is lower than the resistance of the
already active spark, which would "shut off" the first spark, which
takes us right back to the "one path of least resistance" concept.

You're correct that the juice doesn't care what the 'trode-count is. It
cares about one thing, and one thing only: Where is the least
resistance? Once that least resistance is found, the juice tends to keep
flowing through it, rather than seeking a new path. The only thing that
would stop this behavior is if you were to introduce another,
lower-resistance, path for the next spark to jump across. Otherwise, the
(effective) dead-short of the first spark just keeps sucking up the
output from the coil, and you get a single spark (plus or minus anything
that comes from the circuit ringing, which, as mentioned before, will be
sequential, rather than simultaneous, although it might *APPEAR* as if
"all four gaps fired at once" due to the comparative slowness of your
ability to perceive such rapidly occurring events) per firing of the
plug.

I still stand by my statement. Given a coil that is
stiff enough, impedance-wise and that has a turns
ratio giving a final output voltage substantially
higher than the breakdown voltage of the widest gap,
more than one gap would fire. I'm sure I could find
some practical example or build one, but I don't have
time today....

Sorry it can't be done. If you had a coil that was stiff enough, etc.
when the first gap fired, the spark plug would disappear in a clound of
plasma. If you are talking say 10 kv for the output voltage and the
voltage did not drop, then the amperage would be in the 10's or more
kilo amps. Even if it was just 10 kiloamps, the power would be 100
megawatts.


Dan

On 19 Oct 2005 14:41:52 -0700, "
wrote:

Sorry it can't be done. If you had a coil that was stiff enough, etc.
when the first gap fired, the spark plug would disappear in a clound of
plasma. If you are talking say 10 kv for the output voltage and the
voltage did not drop, then the amperage would be in the 10's or more
kilo amps. Even if it was just 10 kiloamps, the power would be 100
megawatts.


Dan

Current in a spark takes some time to rise because of inductances in
the circuit. If there is enough stray (or purposeful) inductance in
the lines from each gap to the supply, then the instaneous voltage in
one gap can drop when it fires while supply voltages to other gaps can
still be rising. If the voltage rate of rise is high enough and the
inductances are high enough, then arbitrarily many gaps could have
sparks going at the same time. The situation would have to be
energy-limited to keep things from vaporizing.

Tom Gardner wrote:
"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
.. .

I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i


Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!


Sign me up too !!!!

Don Foreman wrote:

On 19 Oct 2005 14:41:52 -0700, "
wrote:

Sorry it can't be done. If you had a coil that was stiff enough, etc.
when the first gap fired, the spark plug would disappear in a clound of
plasma. If you are talking say 10 kv for the output voltage and the
voltage did not drop, then the amperage would be in the 10's or more
kilo amps. Even if it was just 10 kiloamps, the power would be 100
megawatts.


Dan

Current in a spark takes some time to rise because of inductances in
the circuit. If there is enough stray (or purposeful) inductance in
the lines from each gap to the supply, then the instaneous voltage in
one gap can drop when it fires while supply voltages to other gaps can
still be rising. If the voltage rate of rise is high enough and the
inductances are high enough, then arbitrarily many gaps could have
sparks going at the same time. The situation would have to be
energy-limited to keep things from vaporizing.

Lightning commonly forks and hits multiple targets. Of course the
voltages and currents are far in excess of anything that would be
practical in the real world and it does a real good job of vaporizing
stuff too.

Pete C.

In article ,
"Pete C." wrote:

Don Foreman wrote:

On 19 Oct 2005 14:41:52 -0700, "
wrote:

Sorry it can't be done. If you had a coil that was stiff enough, etc.
when the first gap fired, the spark plug would disappear in a clound of
plasma. If you are talking say 10 kv for the output voltage and the
voltage did not drop, then the amperage would be in the 10's or more
kilo amps. Even if it was just 10 kiloamps, the power would be 100
megawatts.


Dan

Current in a spark takes some time to rise because of inductances in
the circuit. If there is enough stray (or purposeful) inductance in
the lines from each gap to the supply, then the instaneous voltage in
one gap can drop when it fires while supply voltages to other gaps can
still be rising. If the voltage rate of rise is high enough and the
inductances are high enough, then arbitrarily many gaps could have
sparks going at the same time. The situation would have to be
energy-limited to keep things from vaporizing.

Lightning commonly forks and hits multiple targets.

Ahh... Permit me a correction to that statement, based on observations
of high-speed footage of lightning strikes that was looking at exactly
that phenomenon: (I think I originally saw it as stills in National
Geographic a few years back, and later caught similar work on a
Discovery Channel program - I imagine the films should show up in a
google search if you want to go hunting for them.)

You and I see what *LOOKS LIKE* a single bolt of lightning. But
high-speed video gear shows that there are almost always multiple
separate bolts in what looks like a single strike, each lasting
ridiculously small amounts of time, and usually dancing from one contact
point to another. The main strike, the "leader", is, at the moment of
the hit, the path of least resistance. It fires, and often the point it
hit fires back up the same ionization channel, the cloud fires again,
possibly hitting another spot, which is also likely to fire back, and
the process repeats several times, with each "sub-stroke" of the hit
possibly hitting a different place. Played back at normal one-to-one
speed, such film looks like one big flash with multiple simultaneous
touchdown points. Played back slower, it becomes screamingly obvious
that the "single bolt" you thought you saw is anywhere from 5 to 50 or
more smaller individual strokes. The "main" strike looks so much more
powerful because it's the primary - like re-tracing a line with a pemcil
to make it more visible, more of the sub-strokes come down the ionized
channel, making it look that much "thicker" than strike-channels that
only got one or two of the discharges.

So the more correct form of your statement would be "Lighting commonly
APPEARS to fork and hit multiple targets." But as the films show,
appearances can be deceiving, particularly when it comes to
comparatively slow "meat sensors" trying to observe high-speed
happenings. While it does indeed typically hit multiple targets with
what we perceive to be a single bolt, the camera shows that it actually
does so with a series of discrete "micro-bolts" that happen
sequentially, each one striking its own (possibly separate) target,
rather than as a single bolt striking all the targets simultaneously.

Of course the
voltages and currents are far in excess of anything that would be
practical in the real world and it does a real good job of vaporizing
stuff too.

Ain't that the truth. And we're also talking about gaps that are
typically measured in fractions of an inch, or inches, in some cases,
rather than miles.

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details.

"Ignoramus27736" writeL
all we need is connect them in parallel and in series (say, series of
two blocks of 6 franceformers in series in each block), and we can go
back in time indeed...

Most, if not all, NSTs are center-tap grounded, so a series connection
between units will not work unless you float the cores. Since the cores are
connected to the cases, this presents a fairly sticky situation WRT the
on/off switch, line cord, and device mounting. Without modification, it
just isn't practically possible.

Parallel connections work fine, although be *very* careful - 9kV @ 20mA is
dangerous enough, but 9kV @ 60mA or more requires a significant amount of
caution; one slip up and it's light's out for you - for good.

That having been said, have fun; Franceformers are quality units.

Jon

Ignoramus27736 wrote:
I have a practical question regarding testing of these transformers.

Can I use regular wire to conduct 9 kV, provided that wires are
separated by large distance. (say never below 2 inches except at
terminals).

Can I use regular ring terminals to attach wires to the transformer,
provided that their cable ends poin in the opposite directions?

i

Go to an auto parts store and get some insulated ignition lead.

Chris

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:32:15 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
. ..
I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i

Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!

Well, I have a "Mr Fusion" sitting on the shelf, the hard part is
finding a Flux Capacitor. And getting the rat up to 76 MPH.

Off to Apex for parts...

What's that 1-ton stakebed truck that's all but buried in the back
of their yard again? It's an oldie, a Diamond REO, I think...

-- Bruce --

--
Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:59:32 GMT, Ignoramus27736
wrote:

I have a practical question regarding testing of these transformers.

Can I use regular wire to conduct 9 kV, provided that wires are
separated by large distance. (say never below 2 inches except at
terminals).

You can not run normal TW, THHN, XHHW insulated wire anywhere near a
grounded surface and expect the insulation to hold in 15KV. Most
garden variety wire you can buy at Home Depot is rated for 300V, and
if you go to a supply house you can buy TW or THHN with the thick
insulation rated for 600V.

(Landscaping contractors like using the 600V TW 14-gauge for hooking
up irrigation valves because it's fairly durable when direct buried,
and it's available on the big 2,500' reels for cheap. When you plumb
sprinklers for a large development, you burn through a LOT of wire.)

They make special high-voltage wire for hooking up neon sign tubes
where the wire is in direct contact with grounded surfaces or run
through conduits. The stuff is thick enough to look like sparkplug
wire, but has a 16-ga stranded copper core.

And don't try leaving the transformer case ground floating to
'reduce the chance of a flashover' - that can be a good way to kill
yourself, and we don't want that. Bond it.

Can I use regular ring terminals to attach wires to the transformer,
provided that their cable ends poin in the opposite directions?

Yes, but you'll have to make your own strain relief ends for 'bare'
terminals out of heat shrink tubing, I've never heard of ring
terminals with /that/ oversized sleeves from the factory.

-- Bruce --

--
Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.

"Ignoramus27736" wrote:
, Jon Danniken wrote:
"Ignoramus27736" writeL
all we need is connect them in parallel and in series (say, series of
two blocks of 6 franceformers in series in each block), and we can go
back in time indeed...

Most, if not all, NSTs are center-tap grounded, so a series connection
between units will not work unless you float the cores. Since the cores
are
connected to the cases, this presents a fairly sticky situation WRT the
on/off switch, line cord, and device mounting. Without modification, it
just isn't practically possible.

Parallel connections work fine, although be *very* careful - 9kV @ 20mA
is
dangerous enough, but 9kV @ 60mA or more requires a significant amount
of
caution; one slip up and it's light's out for you - for good.

That having been said, have fun; Franceformers are quality units.

Thanks. You are saying that both primary and secondary coils are
center tappped? Or, as I thought, only secondaries?

Aye; it's the secondaries which are midpoint grounded (I should have
mentioned that). You can indeed connect the primaris in series to cut the
current required; sorry I missed that aspect of your original plan (too much
carb cleaner today). :-)

Jon

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:32:15 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
. ..
I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i

Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!

Or neuter his father. Assuming we could find which bilge swabber in
the 7th Fleet it was.....

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Coaxial cable works fine, just use the center conductor. You can
connect the outer shield to earch if you like.

"I" == Ignoramus27736 writes:

I I have a practical question regarding testing of these transformers.
I Can I use regular wire to conduct 9 kV, provided that wires are
I separated by large distance. (say never below 2 inches except at
I terminals).

I Can I use regular ring terminals to attach wires to the transformer,
I provided that their cable ends poin in the opposite directions?

I i


--
C++: The power, elegance and simplicity of a hand grenade.

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:57:07 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:32:15 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
...
I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i

Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!

Or neuter his father. Assuming we could find which bilge swabber in
the 7th Fleet it was.....

This is something I have been promoting for years - retroactive
sterilization. Someone p*sses you off, just go back in time and
sterilize their grandparents.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

Let the record show that Gunner wrote back on
Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:57:07 GMT in rec.crafts.metalworking :
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:32:15 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


"Ignoramus27736" wrote in message
...
I got a dozen of 9,000V franceformers. I wonder if I can make some
sort of a fun, safe thing with them, possibly halloween
related. Suggestions to make a corpse out of me for Halloween
decorations will not be seriously considered.

i

Hook them up in series for the " Time Machine" I'll go with you, we could
go back and slap Cliff's mother!

Or neuter his father. Assuming we could find which bilge swabber in
the 7th Fleet it was.....

Be simpler to neuter her.

Heck, take out the nads, might get some collateral impacts.
--
pyotr filipivich.
as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James
Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at
producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with."

In article ,
Don Bruder wrote:

[...]

You're correct that the juice doesn't care what the 'trode-count is. It
cares about one thing, and one thing only: Where is the least
resistance? Once that least resistance is found, the juice tends to keep
flowing through it, rather than seeking a new path. The only thing that
would stop this behavior is if you were to introduce another,
lower-resistance, path for the next spark to jump across. Otherwise, the
(effective) dead-short of the first spark just keeps sucking up the
output from the coil, and you get a single spark (plus or minus anything
that comes from the circuit ringing, which, as mentioned before, will be
sequential, rather than simultaneous, although it might *APPEAR* as if
"all four gaps fired at once" due to the comparative slowness of your
ability to perceive such rapidly occurring events) per firing of the
plug.

This is all way over my head, but I've got a question. Those "Plasma
Globe" lamps that have all the pretty purple beams dancing around
within: how is it that they're not limited to one beam? Are the beams
all flickering on and off in sequence at a high frequency?

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net

In article
,
"B.B." u wrote:

In article ,
Don Bruder wrote:

[...]

You're correct that the juice doesn't care what the 'trode-count is. It
cares about one thing, and one thing only: Where is the least
resistance? Once that least resistance is found, the juice tends to keep
flowing through it, rather than seeking a new path. The only thing that
would stop this behavior is if you were to introduce another,
lower-resistance, path for the next spark to jump across. Otherwise, the
(effective) dead-short of the first spark just keeps sucking up the
output from the coil, and you get a single spark (plus or minus anything
that comes from the circuit ringing, which, as mentioned before, will be
sequential, rather than simultaneous, although it might *APPEAR* as if
"all four gaps fired at once" due to the comparative slowness of your
ability to perceive such rapidly occurring events) per firing of the
plug.

This is all way over my head, but I've got a question. Those "Plasma
Globe" lamps that have all the pretty purple beams dancing around
within: how is it that they're not limited to one beam? Are the beams
all flickering on and off in sequence at a high frequency?

THat's very high frequency, the skin effect becomes important and it
wants to split the current.

--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

In article
,
"B.B." u wrote:

In article ,
Don Bruder wrote:

[...]

You're correct that the juice doesn't care what the 'trode-count is. It
cares about one thing, and one thing only: Where is the least
resistance? Once that least resistance is found, the juice tends to keep
flowing through it, rather than seeking a new path. The only thing that
would stop this behavior is if you were to introduce another,
lower-resistance, path for the next spark to jump across. Otherwise, the
(effective) dead-short of the first spark just keeps sucking up the
output from the coil, and you get a single spark (plus or minus anything
that comes from the circuit ringing, which, as mentioned before, will be
sequential, rather than simultaneous, although it might *APPEAR* as if
"all four gaps fired at once" due to the comparative slowness of your
ability to perceive such rapidly occurring events) per firing of the
plug.

This is all way over my head, but I've got a question. Those "Plasma
Globe" lamps that have all the pretty purple beams dancing around
within: how is it that they're not limited to one beam? Are the beams
all flickering on and off in sequence at a high frequency?

At the frequencies and voltages (both *HIGH*) involved in those things,
the "rules" start getting *REALLY* "fuzzy around the edges" - High
frequency AC behaves in a manner that's quite bizarre when compared to
DC (the car spark plug example) or low (less than a couple hundred
hertz) frequency AC. Certain combinations of voltage and frequency can
pitch some of the rules straight out the window - start getting into
microwave frequencies, ferinstance - which aren't all that far above
where those plasma globes usually operate), and you stop being able to
use wires/traces for moving the current around, and find that you've
unwittingly become a plumber, since you start using waveguides (in
simplistic terms, a waveguide is a "water pipe" that contains and
directs RF energy) to move it around.

The globes are special in another way - They're low-pressure (not quite
vacuum tubes like a CRT, but significantly below what we consider
"normal" atmospheric pressure) and usually filled with one of the noble
gasses to enhance the visible discharges - In many (not all, just many)
cases, the streamers you see are the glowing tracks of *POTENTIAL*
sparks. That's due to the low-pressure gas in the globe being excited
enough to fluoresce, but not energized enough to become a "for real
spark". If you pay close attention to them, you'll often find one
streamer that's whatever color that particular ball glows with a
thread-fine white core. *THAT* streamer is the one that's the currently
firing spark-gap. The rest are paths that the white thread *COULD*
decide to take on the next discharge.

--
Don Bruder - - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd for more info