RE: RE: Bleeder Resistors

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Qndre Qndre" <qndre_encrypt@xxxxxxxxxxx>

True. You make your cap a bit worse by adding the bleeder path but if 
you chose the resistors large enough, say 100 MegOhms across each cap 
at an MMC with 9 caps in series and 2 strings in parallel, you 
effectively added a parallel resistance of 450 MegOhms, which only 
causes a leakage current of 22 microamps at a voltage of 10 kiloVolts 
across the cap but manages to discharge a fully charged primary 
capacitor with a total capacitance of 12 nanoFarads to less than 100 
Volts within 6 seconds if I got all the numbers right. I'd say the 
wasted 22 microamps are worth it.

Regards, Q.

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: RE: Bleeder Resistors
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 11:17:41 -0700

Original poster: "Jonathan Peakall" <jpeakall@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Just my $.02...

It should always be a question of risk vs gain, not just risk assesment. In
this case, the bleeder resistors don't waste significant power, prevent
making big sparks and the cost is very low. The benefits are increased
safety. Makes the calculation simple for me: there are no negatives and a
large positive. So, I beleive in bleeder resistors.

Jonathan