闪电消除主张的有效性

A. Mousa
{"title":"闪电消除主张的有效性","authors":"A. Mousa","doi":"10.1109/PES.2003.1270962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since 1971 when commercial devices that employ the point-discharge phenomenon were introduced, their manufacturers repeatedly changed their explanation regarding how such devices would eliminate lightning. This was done in response to on-going criticism from the scientific community. The name of those devices was also changed from lightning eliminators/dissipation arrays (DAS) to charge transfer systems (CTS). This paper summarizes and rebuts both past and present theories that have been proposed by the manufacturers. It also discusses manufacturers' claim of success and explains why eliminating lightning is still considered to be not feasible. Finally, comments are given regarding the attempts of the manufacturers to get a standard for their devices.","PeriodicalId":131986,"journal":{"name":"2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of the lightning elimination claim\",\"authors\":\"A. Mousa\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/PES.2003.1270962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since 1971 when commercial devices that employ the point-discharge phenomenon were introduced, their manufacturers repeatedly changed their explanation regarding how such devices would eliminate lightning. This was done in response to on-going criticism from the scientific community. The name of those devices was also changed from lightning eliminators/dissipation arrays (DAS) to charge transfer systems (CTS). This paper summarizes and rebuts both past and present theories that have been proposed by the manufacturers. It also discusses manufacturers' claim of success and explains why eliminating lightning is still considered to be not feasible. Finally, comments are given regarding the attempts of the manufacturers to get a standard for their devices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":131986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491)\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2003.1270962\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2003.1270962","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

自从1971年采用点放电现象的商业设备问世以来,它们的制造商一再改变他们对这种设备如何消除闪电的解释。这是为了回应科学界持续不断的批评。这些器件的名称也从雷电消除器/耗散阵列(DAS)改为电荷转移系统(CTS)。本文总结和反驳了过去和现在的理论已经提出的制造商。它还讨论了制造商声称的成功,并解释了为什么消除闪电仍然被认为是不可行的。最后,对制造商为其设备制定标准的尝试进行了评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity of the lightning elimination claim
Since 1971 when commercial devices that employ the point-discharge phenomenon were introduced, their manufacturers repeatedly changed their explanation regarding how such devices would eliminate lightning. This was done in response to on-going criticism from the scientific community. The name of those devices was also changed from lightning eliminators/dissipation arrays (DAS) to charge transfer systems (CTS). This paper summarizes and rebuts both past and present theories that have been proposed by the manufacturers. It also discusses manufacturers' claim of success and explains why eliminating lightning is still considered to be not feasible. Finally, comments are given regarding the attempts of the manufacturers to get a standard for their devices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信