Talk:Explosively pumped flux compression generator

Article is above most heads. image is worthless. Why did moderators remove images?

Simple diagram needed. Aluminum tube at end? Where is the capacitor?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flux_compression_generator_2.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flux_compression_generator_1.png

File:Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flux compression generator 2.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flux_compression_generator_2.png

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:1A0D:B1B:21A5:336A:389D:5AEA (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC) 

Untitled

Clearly lots of discussion, but what this article needs is some *facts* on

• real research projects
• real countermeasures
• depolyed examples
• incidents of use (experiments, alledged or confirmed)

EPFCG: translation from french page

Because the french page has much more detail, various interesting diagrams, etc, I thought the english page could be improved by merging the (translated) French page with the current info here. I will start doing this at some point soon. My translation is at Talk:Explosively pumped flux compression generator/Translation from french page. --Dashpool 02:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Richard 88.96.19.102 02:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Reality Check: While it's interesting that Uranium Rhondium Germanium goes superconducting at 280mK and 8 Tesla, bear in mind that 280 milli kelvin is incredibly cold, eg. below the boiling point of the common isotope of Helium, and only accessible using Helium-3 or a dilution refrigerator.

A superconductor has a critical current density as well as a critical field, it does not follow that a superconductor that is stable at 8 Tesla will also carry 1 million amps.

The magnetic field in NMR must be applied for a reasonable length of time (eg. 5 x T1) in order that the nuclear spins relax into equilibrium. A superconducting magnet that provides a constant field allows the nuclear spins to be polarised by coming into thermal equilibrium.

A pulse that is only microseconds long is probably of insufficient duration to allow the nuclei to reach equilibirum. --(this comment was added by 88.96.19.102)

In fact, it is unclear why superconductors would be particularly useful at all in this application: the resistive losses would generally be small. Also, I think peak fields would be much higher than 8 Tesla. There are also all kinds of problems with having ultracold, fragile materials subject to the kind of deformations required for operation. I will remove this paragraph on superconductors unless it can be verified. --Dashpool 22:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Translation from french page: merged

I merged the translation into this page, as I said I would a few months ago. --Dashpool 17:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Microwave's Bomb

The article has nothing about the military uses, of this device.Agre22 (talk) 11:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)agre22

Military use is still classified. However, the USAF knocked out their own Nike radar with a pulse weapon in 1968. For more info search keyword HEMP (hi energy electromagnetic pulse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.211.127 (talk) 23:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Transient Electromagnetic Devices

The link to transient electormagnetic devices not only does not go to that subject, but that subject has evidently been removed or overwritten by another subject. Obviously, there needs to be a page for this subject, even if it is blank for others to fill in, or the link removed. - KitchM (talk) 01:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

comparison to lightning

Comparison to lightning ? The text was "orders of magnitude more powerful than lightning".

However, energy = power * time * volume... basically its a. small b. very brief

The energy delivered is the significant thing.. lightning can deliver massive amounts of energy too

100 MJ would be something like enough to blow up a tree ? So about the same order of magnitude in terms of energy?