Re: Lower secondary cself => better performance?

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

Original poster: "Jim Lux by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net>

The description in Bazelyan and Raizer is what inspired me to suggest that
someone should model a TC with streamers using a dynamically varying load
impedance.  Alternately, you might be able to model the
streamer/leader/spark as a transmission line with very low propagation
velocity (to match the known leader propagation velocity).  The process of
current flowing into the leader is very much like charging a transmission
line, with a wavefront propagating along the line.
B&R comment that doing a full 3D simulation is unwieldy and computationally
intensive, so they describe various 2D and 2.5D models.  As it happens, I
have immense computational resources potentially available to me at work
(JPL), so if we can put together a suitable numerical model, I can see about
running it.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: Lower secondary cself => better performance?


> Original poster: "Bert Hickman by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-net>
>
> Duncan, Paul, and Gary,
>
> in-print publications on this topic is "Spark Discharge" by E. M.
> Bazelyan and Y. P Raizer (CRC Press, 1998, 320pp, ISBN 0-8493-2868-3 -
> $105 from Borders On-Line - cheap it is not... superb it is...). I'll
>