Re: [TCML] thyratrons

[eric goodchild <ericgoodchild@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jimlux, I'm sorry for what I said earlier, got cot up in the heat of the
moment and sent a mean email.
Every one is entitled to there own opinion.

Sorry also for diluting the thread further.

Sinisterly,
Eric Goodchild

On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 10:17 AM, eric goodchild <ericgoodchild@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> 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