[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: DF-DRSSTC 15 was OL-DRSSTC 14
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: DF-DRSSTC 15 was OL-DRSSTC 14
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:13:36 -0600
- Delivered-to: testla@pupman.com
- Delivered-to: tesla@pupman.com
- Old-return-path: <vardin@twfpowerelectronics.com>
- Resent-date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:15:55 -0600 (MDT)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <0Ntb7B.A.HkF.K_uVDB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Malcolm Watts" <m.j.watts@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Terry,
Just a thought - I see no reason why the circuit couldn't de
simplified further by using a single CT in place of the two (there
may be layout considerations?).
Malcolm