Re: [TCML] thyratrons

[eric goodchild <ericgoodchild@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'm to trying to get into a battle here, and you can think what you like but
that doesn't make it correct.

FYI SCRs are silicon based devices.

On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:59 AM, jimlux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> eric goodchild wrote:
>
>> Umm.. DRSSTCs are more effective than SGTC at making longer sparks. Also
>> DRSSTCs in general out perform SGTCs.
>>
>
> "out perform" in what sense.. I'll go for meters of spark vs power input
> for the DRSSTC, particularly in the under 10kW power input category. But
> when it comes to really big coils, SG is more practical (although Greg Leyh
> is working the solid state end on big coils).  I haven't seen any SSTCs of
> any kind making 50 foot sparks, for instance.
>
>
>
>
>> As for modulating the break rate on a SGTC you would need a lot of high
>> power silicon, and at that point you may as well just build a DRSSTC.
>>
>
> Not really.. for amplitude modulation (which for music, is on a few Hz sort
> of bandwidth), you could modulate the primary of the power supply using
> conventional SCRs.
>
> For frequency, you can use a triggered spark gap, or a rotary with a
> variable speed drive.  If they can do it with a Hammond Organ, you can do it
> with a RSG.
>
> It all comes down to what "modulation" means...
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla