Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 50
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
All today's birthdays', congrats!
Ed (49)
JC1 (49)


Next birthdays
06/17 Th3_uN1Qu3 (33)
06/19 sio2 (50)
06/20 Sparrow338 (35)
Contact
If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.


Special Thanks To:
  • Aaron Holmes
  • Aaron Wheeler
  • Adam Horden
  • Alan Scrimgeour
  • Andre
  • Andrew Haynes
  • Anonymous000
  • asabase
  • Austin Weil
  • barney
  • Barry
  • Bert Hickman
  • Bill Kukowski
  • Blitzorn
  • Brandon Paradelas
  • Bruce Bowling
  • BubeeMike
  • Byong Park
  • Cesiumsponge
  • Chris F.
  • Chris Hooper
  • Corey Worthington
  • Derek Woodroffe
  • Dalus
  • Dan Strother
  • Daniel Davis
  • Daniel Uhrenholt
  • datasheetarchive
  • Dave Billington
  • Dave Marshall
  • David F.
  • Dennis Rogers
  • drelectrix
  • Dr. John Gudenas
  • Dr. Spark
  • E.TexasTesla
  • eastvoltresearch
  • Eirik Taylor
  • Erik Dyakov
  • Erlend^SE
  • Finn Hammer
  • Firebug24k
  • GalliumMan
  • Gary Peterson
  • George Slade
  • GhostNull
  • Gordon Mcknight
  • Graham Armitage
  • Grant
  • GreySoul
  • Henry H
  • IamSmooth
  • In memory of Leo Powning
  • Jacob Cash
  • James Howells
  • James Pawson
  • Jeff Greenfield
  • Jeff Thomas
  • Jesse Frost
  • Jim Mitchell
  • jlr134
  • Joe Mastroianni
  • John Forcina
  • John Oberg
  • John Willcutt
  • Jon Newcomb
  • klugesmith
  • Leslie Wright
  • Lutz Hoffman
  • Mads Barnkob
  • Martin King
  • Mats Karlsson
  • Matt Gibson
  • Matthew Guidry
  • mbd
  • Michael D'Angelo
  • Mikkel
  • mileswaldron
  • mister_rf
  • Neil Foster
  • Nick de Smith
  • Nick Soroka
  • nicklenorp
  • Nik
  • Norman Stanley
  • Patrick Coleman
  • Paul Brodie
  • Paul Jordan
  • Paul Montgomery
  • Ped
  • Peter Krogen
  • Peter Terren
  • PhilGood
  • Richard Feldman
  • Robert Bush
  • Royce Bailey
  • Scott Fusare
  • Scott Newman
  • smiffy
  • Stella
  • Steven Busic
  • Steve Conner
  • Steve Jones
  • Steve Ward
  • Sulaiman
  • Thomas Coyle
  • Thomas A. Wallace
  • Thomas W
  • Timo
  • Torch
  • Ulf Jonsson
  • vasil
  • Vaxian
  • vladi mazzilli
  • wastehl
  • Weston
  • William Kim
  • William N.
  • William Stehl
  • Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: High Voltage
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

Best shape for VDG collector?

1 2 
Move Thread LAN_403
Legrand
Thu Mar 23 2006, 06:13PM Print
Legrand Registered Member #340 Joined: Thu Mar 23 2006, 06:05PM
Location: NY
Posts: 5
I know that a "sphere" is the best shape, but I have seen ones (commercial) that are squashed on the bottom (sometimes the top too). What benifits does this offer?

What about the radius of curvature at the entrance to the hole on the bottom of the generator? Is there a size that would be better?

Does the flattened bottom allow for less of "turn" into the hole, making it better that way somehow?

Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.
Back to top
cbfull
Fri Mar 24 2006, 01:24PM
cbfull Registered Member #187 Joined: Thu Feb 16 2006, 02:54PM
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 140
There is quite a bit of information on this subject in this archived thread:

Link2
Back to top
HV Enthusiast
Fri Mar 24 2006, 02:38PM
HV Enthusiast Registered Member #15 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068
sphere. they are typically squashed at the bottom due for producibility issues.
Back to top
Legrand
Mon Mar 27 2006, 03:35PM
Legrand Registered Member #340 Joined: Thu Mar 23 2006, 06:05PM
Location: NY
Posts: 5
cbfull: Actually, that thread seems to be primarily about salad bowl manufacture, not about the specific shape.

EVR: I'm trying to determine if that "squashed bottom" is benificial in any way.

Bsaically, is this:
Squashed
Better than this:
Normal
And if so, why?

[Edit: Go here Link2 to learn how to post pictures.]
Back to top
Sulaiman
Mon Mar 27 2006, 06:56PM
Sulaiman Registered Member #162 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 10:25AM
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3140
The first shape is far better

It doesn't look like a lolipop or a roadsign.
Back to top
HV Enthusiast
Mon Mar 27 2006, 06:59PM
HV Enthusiast Registered Member #15 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068
its not really better. the first shape is much easier to spin then the bottom shape. this is the reason it being shaped the way it is.
Back to top
AndrewM
Mon Mar 27 2006, 10:04PM
AndrewM Registered Member #49 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 04:05AM
Location: Bigass Pile of Penguins
Posts: 362
EastVoltResearch wrote ...

its not really better. the first shape is much easier to spin then the bottom shape. this is the reason it being shaped the way it is.


That suprises me. Given that it is assembled in halves, the top half demonstrates that sphereical hemispheres are very possible to manufacture. Putting a hole in it shouldn't have anything to do with the spinning process.

Why are we overlooking the fact that the radius of curvature is significantly smaller in the sphereical exmaple than in the one with the flattened bottom.
Back to top
HV Enthusiast
Mon Mar 27 2006, 11:38PM
HV Enthusiast Registered Member #15 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068
Geometrically, oblates (first example) do tend to focus charge towards the upper end where spheres will tend to distribute more evenly. This could be another reason, although I do remember speaking with the master over at Science First and he stated that the oblates are easier to spin than spheres.

So perhaps it is a little of both . . .
Back to top
Legrand
Thu Mar 30 2006, 05:28PM
Legrand Registered Member #340 Joined: Thu Mar 23 2006, 06:05PM
Location: NY
Posts: 5
I'm trying to figure out how to say this without sounding terse, bucause I don't mean to sound terse, but I'm not looking for manufacturing reasons, I'm looking at performance reasons.

i.e. If I wanted to get the least amount of leakage (i.e. the best product, longest spark), which would be better? and why?

Thanks for the input thus far! smile
Back to top
HV Enthusiast
Thu Mar 30 2006, 06:24PM
HV Enthusiast Registered Member #15 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068
I think i just stated why an oblate might be used performance wise. With an oblate, the charge gets focused towards the upper end of the oblate whereas a sphere, the charge tends to be uniformly distributed.
Back to top
1 2 

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.