Re: Top Toroid

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Top Toroid
• From: Ed Harris <harris-at-parkave-dot-net>
• Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 16:56:35 -0500
• Subscriber: harris-at-parkave-dot-net Mon Feb 3 21:18:58 1997

    [The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set]
    [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
    [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]


> Subscriber: MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz Sun Feb  2 17:45:33 1997
> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 10:22:28 +1200
> From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Top Toroid
> 
> Hi Skip,
> 
> <snip>
> > I have been following with great interest the various posts on gap
> > losses but not always accepting the conclusions put forth. I assume
from
> > your answer above that as the surge impedance goes down then the surge
> > current increases. Are you then saying that gap losses go up due to
this
> > increased current? Doesn't this assume that the "resistance of the gap
> > while it fires remains constant?
> 
> Not at all. If the gap has a more-or-less fixed conduction voltage,
> then losses scale as I. With a normal resistance they scale as I^2.
> Case 1 is V*I, Case 2 is I^2*R
>  
Just wanted to point out that the fixed conduction voltage scenario is
essentialy what would be predicted by Aryton's arc equation and leads
to a linear decay rather than an exponential one  for a single LC circuit.

-Ed Harris

• Prev: Re: Fw: my $1.00 quasi-electrometer and more "electrostatics" experiments
• Next: Re: polyethylene
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread