We're off the original subject so I think there's diminishing returns on discussing the pros & cons of controlling a reaction no one yet understands and the only guy in the neighborhood with a working box is keeping mum.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Roarty, Francis X < [email protected]> wrote: > This is true, there is latency either way but IMHO PWM is safer, locks > you into shutoff condition for every cycle where the most robust geometry > /hotspots get a chance to diffuse and pump out energy into the immediate > vicinity without melting closed. IMHO the constant drive will burn out the > most robust hotspots and will need to driver a larger quanity of larger > geometry regions to equal the heat generating capacity of the smaller > region. There is very likely an advantage to using pwm/spark gap for the > large dv/dt effect on the plasma as well. > > *From:* Kevin O'Malley [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 20, 2014 11:59 AM > *To:* vortex-l > *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:No automatic control system? > > > > You'll have latency either way. If you take a "statistical" approach you > monitor far more than just temperature. You can base it on a thousand > parameters if you want. And not all of them change in microseconds. > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 5:51 AM, Roarty, Francis X < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Kevin, > > Latency will be the issue, how to instantly sense temp beyond the geometry > into the plasma itself and simultaneously couple the feedback to the > plasma to control it. I think Axil is correct regarding the spark gap of > DGT, it is a simple PWM scheme that relies on duty factor to provide an > average time in runaway instead of actually trying to for a lesser but > permanent runaway state. > > Fran > > > > *From:* Kevin O'Malley [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:36 AM > > *To:* vortex-l > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:No automatic control system? > > > > microsecond statistical control is accomplished regularly through gigabit > and wifi ethernet. It is a valid example. If you're sending a billion > bits/second, you're controlling on the nanosecond level. > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 5:16 AM, Roarty, Francis X < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Kevin, > > Statistical is OK for loose control but in a phenomena that must be kept > on the brink of destruction / half way into runaway but being thermally > bled by a heat sink then fast control is required, hysteris on the scale of > microseconds or less. > > > > *From:* Kevin O'Malley [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 20, 2014 12:28 AM > *To:* vortex-l > > > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:No automatic control system? > > > > Actually, statistical control is a reasonably strong approach. I take > ethernet as an example. > > 10/100 Mbit ethernet was once dominated by National Semiconductor, heavily > relying on their analog background to control tightly the parameters > involved. They were overtaken by a disruptive technology using DSP and > statistical "control". It turned out that it made the analog simpler, and > the digital side of the issue meant that die shrinking took place much > faster. By the time National spent $120M buying Comcore to play catchup, > their die size was 60% larger than Broadcom. The next generation was > gigabit ethernet, where the vast majority of the game was with DSP and > Marvell entered the picture. As each generation of ethernet came out, it > was more digital, more millions of transistors doing DSP where analog used > to be, and eventually it was so cheap that we now buy those chips for $2 at > 1Gig/s when they were originally $45 at 0.1Gig/s > > By using a statistical approach, Rossi puts himself on the digital scaling > roadmap rather than the analog scaling roadmap. It has tremendous merits. > > What is the danger? If an air conditioner goes on during August when it > ain't hot, what's the harm? If Rossi's device goes kaflooiee in the first > generation, it will just stop working. By the time the 3rd generation > rolls out, it will no longer go kaflooiee, and it will be under far tighter > control than if he had taken the "analog" route. > > > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Statistical control is like saying that most of the time it is hot in > august so turn on the air conditioners in august. Most of the time you are > correct, but sometimes a bad thing happens. > > > > > > >
