Some thoughts on how the TPU might work.

[EMdevices]

Localjoe, 

I like that you're sincere and seeking.  I would just ignore the others that have nothing to contribute.  Don't even engage them in conversation.   These forums have a way of shaping egos like nothing else can.  Everyone tries to sound like they know something, but I doubt they know anything useful or else they would be elsewhere doing something about it.

On the SERIES question,   SM said that he uses a few collector coils (2 or 3) stacked, and he can run them in series or parallel, etc..   However, the question seems to be if you can put a CONTROL coils and a COLLECTOR coil in SERIES.   Well, that's a good question, and SM said that yes you can.   It's like a "...furnace that feeds itself.."  to use his own words,  and "... the signal becomes the source.."  etc..   And to use common sense in closing the loop to see if you have over unity, you would in fact hook up the output to the source, and if there is a power gain then you got it, it will amplify and go into self oscillation.

At lest that's my take on it.

EM

[innovation_station]

 

somthing tells me you guys gonna be at  this a wile lol

ist

[Grumpy]

yup

[BEP]

Do we conclude that the connection of the collector to the control wires is for closing the loop and self-running a TPU. 

So, this connection is not "required" for operation.

I am, at least for a self runner. If a design with gain is found without the controls and collectors connected as a continuous circuit then a redesign will be required to make it a self-runner. Controls and collectors in series or parallel willl effect the resonance of each.
Also, I suspect any mixing and beats will be dependent upon this interconnection.

Although it would be an excellent step to achieve gain alone.

[BEP]

Well its says The Thyratrons did the same function as the new scr's the only diff i'm seeing is it is a vacuum tube as opposed to solid state. The need to go to the quick off state is necessary because of the duty cycle timing 10 on 90 off and the "staccato of electrostatic bursts" that happen in the 10 percent thats on.  Take those concepts and read this sentence twice ... i think we found our answer.

"Currents are induced in relationship to the strength of the magnetic field     *** More wire .. larger feild****              And voltages are induced based on the "rate-of-change of that flux". Rate of change... duty cycle .. 10 on 90 off and a "staccato of electrostatic bursts" that happen in the 10 percent thats it is on.   
Tell me what you think

My opinions:

Thyratrons were faster in on/off times and handled higher voltages and current. Althought the gap is either closing or closed by now. I find the 'off' time as most important. Both are also the 'rate of change', in my view.

'Rate of change' could also be seen as the change of potential over time during one pulse - not just the duty cycle. This would then allude to achieving a higher voltage for a pulse or P-P sine.