Re: Cap Experiments and more ?????

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Cap Experiments and more ?????
• From: "Barton B. Anderson" <mopar-at-uswest-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:39:50 -0600
• Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

Rienhard,
I performed your same cap measurement. Except I the I didn't have the same
poly,
had only a trash bag (only 0.35mils). I ended up measuring 18.3nF flat, and
69.4nF
rolled. I was way off the calculated. Your measured value compared to
calculated
was:

Flat: ~6.5 times lower.
Rolled: ~ 6 times lower.

My measured value compared to calculated was:

Flat: ~ 3.3 times lower.
Rolled: ~5 times lower.

I want to do this test again using better poly as well as compare thick vs.
thin
poly. I'm expecting with thin poly, the margin for error is huge compared
to thick
poly's. This may account for both our findings. Unfortunately I didn't get
enough
time tonight to get that far. I'll post my results in detail next time.

Bart

Tesla List wrote:

> Original Poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <mopar-at-uswest-dot-net>
>
> I would at this time, try your other diectric under the same scenario of
> tests and
> see how that works out. If it was me, I might go as far as getting a couple
> alluminum sheets of some given size and try the test (who knows, maybe it's
> the
> foil? everything should be considered). As a matter of fact, I have an old
> flat
> plate cap which was built out of alluminum sheets about 8" x 12" now
> disassembled.
> I might try this test myself tomorrow and see what happens with a couple of
> the
> alluminum sheets.
>

• Prev: Re: Oops ? To A.C Kuntz Oops ? To A.C Kuntz
• Next: Cap Experiments and now less ??
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread