Running without secondary

From:  Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent:  Friday, June 19, 1998 12:58 AM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: Running without secondary

Hi Gary,

> From:  Gary Lau  18-Jun-1998 0758 [SMTP:lau-at-hdecad.ENET.dec-dot-com]
> Sent:  Thursday, June 18, 1998 7:28 AM
> To:  tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject:  Running without secondary
> >   Before you try your idea, I thought you should be warned that it is not
> >advisable to run your system in the manner you described.  I have not tried
> >this, but many on the list have said that this is a good way to kill your
> >power supply.  Apparently, there is no way to dissapate the energy if you run
> >without the secondary and it will feed back to your transformer and burn it
> >out.  
> Could it be that the longer ringdown presents the power supply with a
> higher duty cycle of high frequency bias, and that it's the extended duty
> cycle, not a difference in magnitude, that makes this bad?

What makes it bad is that it subjects the caps to high amplitude 
reversals for a much longer period of time. In short, it beats them 
to death. TC cap ratings have as much to do with the reversals as 
with voltage. Stress is both mechanical and electrical in nature.