RE: SSTC vs SPTC was ( Re: NSTand PT replacement xmfrs)

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

Original poster: "Steve Conner" <steve.conner-at-optosci-dot-com> 

 >Not this power vs. energy crap again . . .  ;)

It's true, from what I have seen, the new ISSTC type coils can produce a
longer arc for a given power input than a SGTC. I think there are a few
reasons for this-

1. The long burst length of the ISSTC (much longer than a SGTC) is conducive
to growing long, straight streamers that don't fork and wiggle too much.
They seem to like that long steady burst of RF better than the sharp "kick
in the butt" they get from a SGTC or OLTC. I believe this because I have
seen the performance of an OLTC is somewhat less than a ISSTC with the same
BPS and bang energy.

2. The ISSTCs work at a lower BPS than a SGTC (Dan and Steve run their coils
at 100 BPS) and it is well known that lower BPS gives longer sparks for a
given power.

3. The solid-state switches have lower losses than a spark gap (I estimate
they're 90% efficient)

***

BTW- I think John Couture just muddies the waters with his talk of power vs.
energy, and controlled sparks. TC spark length is indeed a random
phenomenon, but that doesn't make it any harder to measure as long as you
are careful to be consistent with runtimes etc.

The spark length plotted against frequency of occurrence probably follows a
Poisson distribution or such like, and if you were really pedantic, you
could take measurements of how often a target at various distances is hit,
then fit a Poisson distribution to it, and quote your TC's spark length as
"There is a 95% chance of striking a grounded target 66 inches away during a
one minute run"

Steve C.