RE: [TCML] MMC for 4 mot SRGTC

["Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>]

I have never built a MOT-based coil, so take this comment with a grain of salt, but is using a sync gap necessary?  Using a higher break rate would diminish the required cap value.  I think I've heard more async gaps used with MOT's than sync gaps.  Maybe the same with pole-pig coils.  A LTR cap there would be HUGE.

Regards, Gary Lau
MA, USA

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Kris Grillo
> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 11:49 AM
> To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [TCML] MMC for 4 mot SRGTC
>
> I am putting together a 6" coil with 4 MOT power supply and a 120 bps sync rotary
> gap.  I would like to run the mots wide open (no ballast). I estimated 8400 V .5A for
> the transformer output. For the MMC, JavaTC is saying I need .4117uf for LTR!
> That seems huge to me. I have 60 of the 942's for 5 strings of 12 right now, and I
> planned on doubling that to get to .1249uf before I get it up and running, but that is
> still less than resonant. I could probably swing another 84 caps to get to 12 x 12 for
> a just about resonant cap, but 336 more caps for the .4117uf value is a little out of
> my price range right now. Is it so important to run larger than resonant cap with a
> mot driven srg coil? The mots are under oil, if that matters. Any suggestions?
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
> Access, No Cost.
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla