Re: Optimal Quenching Tests

To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Optimal Quenching Tests
From: Benson_Barry%PAX5-at-mr.nawcad.navy.mil
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 07:05:00 -0500 (EST)
Subscriber: Benson_Barry%PAX5-at-mr.nawcad.navy.mil Mon Feb 3 21:28:27 1997


The resistor switch model is
the best that I can do at the
moment as the spark gap
model is not accurate.  I
haven't tried Jim's signal
generator model yet.  I
think that it will be the best
until someone can generate
a better one.  The version
of spice that I have doesn't
allow me to dig into the device
model equations.
Barry

 ----------
From: "tesla"-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com-at-PMDF-at-PAXMB1
To: Benson Barry; "Tesla-list-subscribers"-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com-at-PMDF-at-PAXMB1
Subject: Re: Optimal Quenching Tests
Date: Wednesday, January 29, 1997 5:24AM

<<File Attachment: 00000000.TXT>>
> Subject: Re: Optimal Quenching Tests
> Subject: Re: Optimal Quenching Tests

Subscriber: bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-com Tue Jan 28 22:46:16 1997
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:34:43 -0800
From: Bert Hickman <bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-com>
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Optimal Quenching Tests


Barry,

Curses! Foiled again!! :^)

In your simulation, did you notice the predicted linear decrement when
the gap was firing? From a practical standpoint, I'm very interested in
seeing if there are any _significant_ performance or operational
differences between using a more exact model and a simple
resistor/switch model for a two-coil system. Thanks in advance, Barry!

 -- Bert --