[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Resulting static after TC runs
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: Resulting static after TC runs
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 19:24:13 -0700
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Old-return-path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:32:35 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <W1rUaD.A.exE.BdnJCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Malcolm Watts" <m.j.watts@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2 Mar 2005, at 7:20, Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: "Steve Conner" <steve.conner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Steve's explanation seems to make sense to me. The OLTC can easily
> >"always" cut "off" on say a positive half cycle.
> Well the primary current can, but the secondary current (and voltage)
> always rings down gradually which I think was Malcolm's point- the
> amplitude of the "final swing" is infinitely small. It's more likely
> to be the "corona rectification" effect which happens because the
> electrodes have different breakout voltages depending on whether the
> charge is positive or negative. There were actually high voltage cold
> cathode rectifier "tubes" made on this principle AFAIK.
That is indeed what I was hinting at.
> BTW- I was reading "Troubleshooting Analog Circuits" by Bob Pease and
> I came across a letter that Bob had published in the book, written by
> a Malcolm Watts of New Zealand, I wonder if it is the same Malcolm
> Watts who posts here?
I plead guilty.
> Steve C.