[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Equi-drive vs. standard drive, was SGTC



Original poster: "Gerry  Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Phil,

The caps should not block 60 Hz current. They only block DC current. If 60 Hz current were blocked, the caps would not charge. Since two caps in series needs to equal the same capacitance of one cap in series, the 60 Hz charging current is the same. I think what the equi drive caps do is to keep the 60Hz voltage on the TC primary at something close to zero, although, dont ask me why this would be important.

Gerry R.

Original poster: FIFTYGUY@xxxxxxx
In a message dated 4/30/07 12:47:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:

>I believe Hull's hypothesis was
>that blocking the 60Hz on the  primary, via a capacitor on each side, >would
>make for a more pure  ringdown.

I *still* don't see how the "Equidrive"  could affect even 60 Hz on the
primary. If you have just one cap in series with the primary, wouldn't it block 60
Hz current just as well?
Is there some stray significant coupling to ground that  I'm overlooking?

> Without bleeder resistors on each cap,  there
>is a chance that the capacitors will be in a charged or partially >charged
>state when the power is removed.

Yet again, I *still* don't understand why there's a  difference with the
"Equidrive". The two caps are tied together by the primary, and the transformer's
secondary completes the circuit.

>We found no measurable difference in arc length or RF  output
>characteristics. We did find that a cap would occasionally be left >charged
>and for that, we abandoned the Equi-Drive topology.

    Thanks for the anecdote!
    Obviously, it must be *possible* to end up with a  charged cap. I know
I'm sounding like a broken record, but I'd just like to know  *why*?

-Phil LaBudde




************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.