Inverse Marx generator

Oddly, the answer is 'yes', if you allow induction by a static field as 'transfer'. It's without loss of charge, because you merely move the charged item near the grounded electrode, then remove the ground connection and pull the charged item away. Voila! Now the electrode is charged, too.

Glue lots of electrodes to a wheel and it's a Wimshurst machine.

OK. same question, with the capacity to perform work being involved.

Static fields are one thing.

Coulombs! LOTS and LOTS of coulombs. That's what we need.

It is like the difference between the 'jit' (just in time) or 'barely just over adequate' self winding watch, and a HUGE Clock spring being wound up tight in a short period, which can perform far more work in the short term.

They

Exactly. The very reason why so few ever reply to Bull Slowman. I don't think i have seen anything uncivil, let alone foul language from that jerk. =46oul language merely accelerates the process.

That sounds like a sure fire recipe for getting screwed by SPICE. I have watched it happen so very many times.

As if an idiot like you represents the standard. Exactly indeed.

energy

But i asked where it went to, and HOW it got there.

Trained speculation and NO information on the _how_ let alone the _why_. Or colloquially, "hand waving".

Spice is good when the math would be tedious, like simulating nonlinear control loops, or hairy voltage dividers, or things where realistic, not simplified, semiconductor behavior must be modeled. Or when you want to tune a circuit and want to see the possibilities and have no hard definition of "best." It has to be used carefully, constantly sanity-checked, because it's easy to make a mistake. Agree, Spice in the hands of amateurs produces bizarre results.

Some circuits just aren't understandable in an analytical sense, in other words are too complex for closed-form solutions or manual numerical analysis. That's when computers get handy. Different tools for different problems: Spice, Octave, Matlab, Sonnet, Nuhertz, or even write your own simulation in PowerBasic or some such.

We're just finishing up designing a bank of 32 digital IIR lowpass filters, each 8 poles Bessel or Butterworth, programmable from 100 KHz to 1 Hz. There's no way to do this analytically... the basic pole/zero theory is plain enough, but the digital issues are defiant of any theory we can get our hands on. We're simulating these filters at the pure math level and again as VHDL, all RAMd/MUXd/DSPblocked/pipelined. One has to imagine the possible failure modes (overflow, underflow, limit cycle oscillations, coefficient truncation, whatever) and use the sim to explore the hazards.

John

That's not an ideal diode. It has capacitance, series resistance, and shunt conductance. As I said, loss but not a lot. You're the stickler for accounting for "real life" losses, aren't you?

John

If you haven't learned basic circuit theory at your age, you never will.

John

But we wouldn't be bothered by Slowman's rants at all, if certain narcissistic jerks didn't keep feeding him. ...Jim Thompson

The only people who get "screwed" by Spice are those amateurs who don't understand what .OPTIONS settings, particularly "time-step" values can do to you.

Then there are those who avoid showing a Spice result for their abortion... to avoid embarrassment ;-) ...Jim Thompson

Your question was unclear. Are you asking where the energy came from to initially charge the caps, or where the energy went at the instant of discharge? I answered the latter.

If your question was the former, there's no need to answer. Charged caps was an assumption as an initial condition.

Please state your question more clearly.

John

Are you using saturating adders?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs