Re: SSTC idea

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

Original poster: "Stephen Conner by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <steve-at-scopeboy-dot-com>

At 20:42 15/03/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Original poster: "Jim Lux by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" 
><jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net>
>
><snip>
>
>Herein lies the fundamental difference between CW (tube and SSTC) coils and
>disruptive coils.  A huge tube coil (even a 100 kW one) doesn't have the
>peak powers that a disruptive coil does. And that's why the spark
>characteristics are so different.  The power levels when the spark is
>growing are radically different.
>
>
>By lowering the fres to something lower, you can get the peak currents down
>(L gets big) for the same bang energy, but that effectively increases the
>time over which the energy is transferred, reducing peak power to something
>reasonable.. Go far enough, and the peak to average ratio starts to get
>close to 1 and you have a CW coil.
>
>Staccato operation of a tube coil is sort of in between..

I think this is pretty interesting, I can see the disruptive and CW camps 
kind of converging nowadays. If Jimmy Hynes ever gets his DRSSTC to work 
then the confusion will be complete. As far as I understand it, the DRSSTC 
is a kind of ultra-staccato SSTC with a resonant primary that builds up 
hundreds of amps. It operates in short bursts of ~100uS and if you ever 
tried to run it CW it would vaporise.

Steve C.