Re: MMC or Maxwell? Which is better?

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Jim Lux" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net> 

 >
 > Experimenters have been blaming companies and caps far too long.  Use them
 > properly and forget about failures --- it just won't happen.

I heartily agree!

   If everyone
 > does this failure complaints on this list will become ancient history.
 > Something perhaps for the archives.

Now you're dreaming... TC'ing is like drag racing.  The temptation to turn
up the "brave screw" a bit more is pretty strong.  I think that the cap
serves as the "weak link" or "fuse" in the system,  since filters/safety
gaps make it hard to kill the NST, there are basic (saturation) reasons why
you can't overvolt the NST, copper tubing in the primary just won't fail,
and neither will the spark gap.  The only part left that can really fail is
the cap: and, because increased ratings are expensive, compared to things
like gaps and copper tubing, it's the one that will ALWAYS be run closest to
its limits.

What I think what we are seeing is a better characterization of the "edges
of the envelope", just like folks with ARP crank bearing bolts, blowers, and
propylene oxide on their fuelies.  Run to the edge, and a bit beyond, and
hope it holds together for a few seconds.  And, just like racers with their
own flow benches and dynos, TCers are developing measurement techniques (and
scrounging HV test equipment)... Too bad this stuff is all too practical, so
it would be hard to get it published in a peer-reviewed journal (where they
like many pages of analysis and equations).