I think this could be made a easier.

1) Why the heatsink at all?  During theese microsecond pulses there is no chance at all that the heat from die propagate even to the surface of th eSCR package.  Heatsink is only relevant if diong discharges short after each other in time.  And even then not very hot; take average current (easiest to measute as capacitor bank charge current) times SCR conducting voltage (max 2V?) Not many watts.

2) Why one expensive SCR?  Much easier to get parts if desinged using many parallel circuits of {discharge cap, SCR, coil winding}.  So that the coil is made up of twenty intertwined conductors, each connected to in one end to an own SCR; in the eother to an own capacitor.  Just make sure everythng is parallel/symmetrical and fire all triac firmly at the same time by another firing SCR. 

Maybe a hefty coil could be made using wound enameled copper wires, and clad with epoxy and glass fibre...  And inner and outer spliter protection of polycarbonate tube.

That way we can build heftier things using cheaper parts.  (although the coil is a bit harder to make.
(I would not try building such thing anyway...)
/Morgan

Mike Hord 14:57 2005-12-13:
>Most metal deforming EM crusher apparati out there
>today do their dirty work via spark gaps and other
>classical high-voltage methods.  This chap has done
>it with an SCR, which doesn't self destruct in the
>process.  Even his compression coil lasts longer than
>the standard single-fire designs.
>
>Peak power delivered is ~22.5 MW.  Equally impressive
>is the calculated magnetic field strength: from normal
>Earth ambient to 7.8T in ~300 ns.
>
>http://www.powerlabs.org/pssecc.htm
>
>Mike H.
>
>-- 
>http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>View/change your membership options at
>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist