Re: Streamer simulation

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

Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net> 

I don't know that a fractal model is optimum (streamer development isn't 
scale independent, like fractals are), but some sort of cellular automata 
model might be...

Essentially, you've got chunks of air that are in one of three states... 
nothing, streamer growing, and streamer fully formed, and then they get 
connected in an essentially random (tree structured) way.  The physics 
going on at the tip of the streamer is pretty much the same, whether it's 
at the end of a 10cm streamer or a 1m streamer.  Likewise, what's going on 
inside the developed streamer is essentially the same regardless of where 
along the streamer it is.


At 08:10 AM 9/22/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>Original poster: "Gerry Reynolds" <gerryreynolds-at-earthlink-dot-net>
>( was modeling and simulation)
>
>Hi Jim and Antonio,
>
>This discussion on streamers and propagation reminds me of fractal images.
>I'm wondering if fractal modeling could reduce the randomnous and complexity
>of the streamer model and perhaps more easily allow predictions of streamer
>propagation and the effect on the topload and its ability to sustain the
>propagation.  Such a model would emulate the random structure of a streamer
>but would actually be a simple model that is repeated (in a fractal sorta
>way) to the desired resolution.  Some of the following behaviors would
>certainly not be modeled but sufficient simularity to real streamer growth
>may be possible.  Perhaps a crazy idea but a thought at least.
>
>Gerry R
>Ft Collins, CO
>
> > What is missing is the direction of streamer growth, certainly
> > following approximately the electric field around the coil, with
> > a tendency of the segments to rise due to convection (the simulation
> > could even produce "banjo" effects). The convection could also stretch
> > the segments, lowering their temperature, eventually leading to
> > the dissipation of formed streamers.
> > A dedicated simulator, adding random direction effects, multiple
> > breakouts, and forkings, plotting the results, would be funny.
> >