CONOR WHYTE wrote:
That was what I was trying to say. Some MMC designs I have seen use an over volt gap over the entire MMC to protect it. -- are you saying this is a bad idea? mike hammerused this design and it proved reliable for him. personally I have never used it.
Not sure how my name got into this discussion since Ive been pretty much out of coiling for at least 4 or 5 years. I still read the mailing list and still have the interest but just dont have the time or resources anymore. Imagine the surprise when my name jumps out at me during a quick scan of postings. Im not sure why this person attached my name to this idea of protecting a MMC via a spark gap. I was pretty much out of coiling by the time MMCs became all the rage. All of my caps were of the poly/foil type. Some flat plate types and some rolled plate types. To the best of my recollection I have never advocated placing a spark gap directly across the primary cap. If such a gap were to fire it would probably place a great deal of stress on that cap from the very high currents involved. I have strongly advocated safety gaps placed directly across the transformer terminals as a fail safe of last resort as well as a safety gap place in parallel with the main gap. Mike Hammer _______________________________________________ Tesla mailing list Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla