Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: nospam@xxxxxxxxxx (Don Pearce)
- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:59:15 GMT
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:50:44 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don Pearce wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Don Pearce wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Ian Iveson wrote:
Nick Gorham wrote
If the electrical potential is not sufficient to accelerate them to
required velocity, the anode will get hot, but not emit x-rays.
I'll go along with that, more or less.
Current is equally important.
No it isn't.
Current is irrelevant to the mechanism of X-ray production.
Come on chaps, you are arguing about two different things - the
electron energy needed to generate electrons at all, and the total
energy generated by a beam of electrons (of sufficient individual h *
nu type energy). Beam current determines the power of the x-ray beam
generated, and hence the energy in that beam.
I know but Iveson has it upside down. Of course current determines the ultimate
power but there's no 'current threshold' for X-ray production.
Just read his posts, and he hasn't claimed one.
So what's this then ?
" Current is equally important. "
7zGui.63995%24%25v3.17560%40fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk
A reference to factors which determine the amount of heat the anode
needs to dissipate. Looks just fine to me.
d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com
.
- References:
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Phil Allison
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Nick Gorham
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Don Pearce
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Phil Allison
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Ian Iveson
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Nick Gorham
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Ian Iveson
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Don Pearce
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Don Pearce
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- Prev by Date: Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- Next by Date: Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- Previous by thread: Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- Next by thread: Re: 300b/GM70 Amp
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|