TSSP: List Archives

From: "Malcolm Watts"
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 13:24:42 +1300
Subject: Re: [TSSP] Top Voltage

Hi Paul,

On 13 Oct 2002, at 23:33, Paul wrote:

> Boris wrote:
> > 1" sphere  will have much higher surface field
> > (multifold) for given voltage than 1" thick wire
> > (which is long ,"perpendicular" to ground plane (at
> > average height say 10 m).
> 
> In support of Boris's answer, the familiar bathtub
> shape applies to the long horizonal wire over ground plane,
> (both distributed C and charge distribution) so the
> surface field over most of the conductor may be quite
> a bit less than you'd expect just by its radius.
> 
> Malcolm wrote:
> > The absolute losses in the secondary ground path are increasing as 
> > base current goes up. Too early in the morning for me to look from 
> > the point of view of percentage losses. Does this make sense?
> 
> Not entirely, although the absolute losses are going up, the
> Q should remain constant, or increase slightly.  The slight
> increase comes from the assumption of a constant saturation
> voltage of the IGBTs, so that the VI loss in the devices 
> becomes a smaller fraction of total loss as the current
> goes up.

Which of course I realize and have espoused in the past. My mistake - 
I thought the post was referring to the Q of the secondary alone. 
Told you it was too early in the morning.

Regards,
malcolm
 
> As Vfire is raised from 25V to 300V we would expect the
> Q to first rise as primary device loss becomes less significant,
> then would start to fall as streamer loading takes over.
> Seems that we may be seeing that fall start as early as 100V?
> Wonder if if rises before that.
> 
> Terry, have you looked in the dark for signs of early
> breakout?  
> 
> Oh well, too late at night for me at this end.  I'll have
> to recompute things using a revised secondary Q, but it's
> not going to make more than a few % difference, I think.
> --
> Paul Nicholson,
> --
> 



Maintainer Paul Nicholson, paul@abelian.demon.co.uk.