Secondary Modeling with Streamer Load

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

Original poster: "Terry Fritz by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <terrellf-at-qwest-dot-net>

Hi Jim,

It may not be hard to make such and attempt with Paul's TSSP program for a
CW coil.  I think he can fairly easily add top loads (like scope probes
;-)).  My testing indicates that a CW coil has a pretty consistent series
RC top load which is similar to a probe load.  Paul's program does not take
into account primary to secondary coupling as is used in my CW coil but it
may be possible to consider a base fed case.  If the base impedance were
around 50 ohms, the generator I have should drive very well.  If the
impedance does vary a bit with time (I bet it does to some  extent during a
cycle), then that maybe could be taken into account too.

Such a real CW coil to computer modeled CW coil attempt should be fairly
straight forward.  I don't think it takes any great computer power in the
CW case and Paul's program can run on any UNIX PC.  I can work on getting a
CW coil with instrumentation going if someone wants to try this.  We could
then see how the secondary voltage and current distributions look and take
one more step to doing a disruptive coil.  However, I would think the next
step would be getting a primary to secondary model working with the TSSP
program.  Then streamer data could be supplied and then...  

There is one problem I for see with streamer growth measurements.
Streamers grow over many cycles, but the impedance data is buried inside
the fine detail of the individual cycles.  In other words if you set a
scope to pick up the details, you will run out of data points fast!
However, perhaps multiple sweeps with infinite screen persistence could
pick up multiple cycles in succession...  I'll think on that...

One could also consider a model where the secondary is "filled" with energy
from the primary and then quenched so as to remove the primary from the
system.  Then a real time streamer load (z(t)) could be added without
primary to secondary energy transfer and coupling issues.  Not quite "real"
but the data would point to where to go next.  This case is not terribly
different from a single shot disruptive coil's operation.  Taking real
measurements for that case is relatively simple.

I too think a 2D model would be very accurate,  Simply have the streamer
firing straight up thought the axis of the coil so that all the present
cylindrical modeling tools would apply.  A theoretically very accurate case
but still friendly to model...  I have played with that a little with
E-Tesla and it seems to work fine.

Cheers,

	Terry


At 08:05 AM 2/16/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>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
>>
>
>
>