Re: Westcode Devices

• To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
• Subject: Re: Westcode Devices
• From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
• Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:48:28 -0600
• Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

From: 	Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent: 	Tuesday, November 18, 1997 2:33 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: Westcode Devices

Hi Scott,
           Yes - I am contemplating replacing the gap in a disruptive 
coil with the devices. Advantages - very low voltage drop (reduction 
in gap loss), cycle-by-cycle quench control. It will be a while 
before I get around to it - too much else to do.

Malcolm

> From:   Scott Stephens[SMTP:stephens-at-enteract-dot-com]
> Sent:   Monday, November 17, 1997 5:35 AM
> To:     Tesla List
> Subject:    Re: Westcode Devices
> 
> At 11:31 PM 11/15/97 -0600, you wrote:
> >
> >The repetitive dI/dt limit of 180A/us is the limiting factor for this
> >device.  Exceeding this value will produce a puncture on the die next
> >to the gate structure, caused by secondary breakdown.  Otherwise, the
> >SCR looks great, provided that the primary dI/dt (2*pi*Fpri*Ipeak) is 
> >comfortably less than 180A/us.
> 
> Sorry for a dumb question, but how will this device be used? As an
> oscillating component in place of a spark gap?

• Prev: Re: bought caps
• Next: Re: 100 Watt Resistors
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread