Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> At 11:11 PM 6/6/2006, Tesla list wrote:
Original poster: "dest" <dest@xxxxxxxxxxx> Re: ScanTesla V7.61>Original poster: Vardan vardan01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Most of the streamer "model" is based on Bazelyan and Raizer's "Spark >Discharge" book. so now Marco can don`t bother anymore with his model, right? and you have succesfully implemented positive and negative dicharges in your model too, and it can predict sparks lenght with +- couple of inches of accuracy, etc? i think you can call Bazelyan then and inform him about this too, not only tesla listies % )
There's a bit of difference between an algorithm which predicts behavior of a system to within a few percent and an actual model of what's going on. A trivial example would be that one can very accurately represent the gravitational force between two objects with the equation:
F= k*m1*m2/d^2However accurate that equation is, it doesn't say much about how or why the force occurs.
In the case of tesla coil modeling (with sparks), we're somewhere in between. We have equations that are "physics derived" in that they have a basis in the physics underlying what's going on (i.e. omega = 1/sqrt(LC)), and we have others that are essentially empirical models of observed behavior: 220K resistors in series with wires.
As is widely acknowledged, the actual modeling of sparks, in physical terms, is poorly understood. That doesn't stop us from using an approximation that is based on observed behavior and which allows better prediction of actual coil behavior. The fact that the model resembles current thinking on what's actually happening with the spark is just a manifestation that such a model is computationally or conceptually efficient.
>The streamer part of the program really is not based much on >circuit theory. of coz not, but the power calculation is based on simplified lumped model, and lenght calculation too. if all is so simple - why do the "russians" say, that there is NO any accurate models at all? and many of their formulas are suitable only for "order of magnitude" calcs?
A lumped order of magnitude model for a spark/streamer is a heck of a lot better than NO model, or modeling it as a fixed R and fixed C. A time varying model that matches observed behavior for actual sparks is a logical next step.
While it would be nice to have an actual model of actual behavior, we're a ways from that.
The next step is to use the model to predict some measurements (for systems that aren't the ones you built the model from), go make the measurements, and see if it matches. If the model is built from some understanding or theory of the physics, so much the better.