Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #03693
To: "John A. deVries II" zozzles@lanl.gov, beam@corp.sgi.com
From: Dave Hrynkiw dave@solarbotics.com
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:44:55 -0600
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Why not a new Solar Engine design?
At 10:09 AM 5/25/1999 , John A. deVries II wrote:
> >It is more efficient when using low-power solarcells. Otherwise (like when
> >using our SC series), it'll lock up after the first pulse. The UJT is a
> >bear to find though!
>
>And Dave scores a whopping 1000 points for noting that the SC series has a
>lock-up problem (even though I faintly recall that it is an oscillation
>problem rather than a "just can't turn off problem.") And no, I'm not
>being the least bit sarcastic.
Ummm...actually, I was referring to our "SC" Solarcell series. YES, the
traditional SE can lockup, but this UJT type is much more prone to it with
any of our solarcells. This type works much better with the high-efficiency
INDOOR solarcells (usually long and rectangular, like in solar
calculators). The current our ourdoor-style solarcells generate tend to
lock it up.
As for the suneater series, I'm glad to see they're out there. A lock-up
proof SE is a great advance in BEAMtech.
-Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Um, no - that's H,R,Y,N,K,I,W. No, not K,I,U,U, K,I,_W_. Yes,
that's right. Yes, I know it looks like "HOCKYRINK." Yup, only
2 vowels. Pronounciation? _SMITH_".
http://www.solarbotics.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/alt-beam
http://www.egroups.com
- Simplifying group communications
Home