Re: Equidrive-ing me crazy

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Equidrive-ing me crazy
• From: "Malcolm Watts" <malcolm.watts-at-wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
• Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 05:43:43 -0600
• Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
• Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

HI David,

> Original Poster: "David Trimmell" <davidt-at-pond-dot-net> 
> 
> Hi, Please forgive me if I am wrong ;-) , I think that it was a Richard
> Hull (or possibly TCBOR?, anonymous?...), that was responsible for its
> concept. It does seem to follow a synergistic approach, equally dividing
> the C across the primary. But I doubt it would have any "major" benefits
> for a less then "fully" optimized coil. Anyone actually see that this made
> a difference? I tried it with non equal C with expectable results, but you
> must get as close as possible to a balance for any real potential, I
suppose...

The circuit appears in the Colorado Springs Notes (what circuit 
doesn't? :)  I'd have to dig my copy out to give a page number etc. 
I have never seen a better result from doing this and I don't expect to 
ever see one. The only difference between this and the single 
capacitor job is in physical layout and I don't think physical layout 
with regard to where the primary cap/s is/are positioned makes a 
single bit of difference.

Regards,
malcolm

• Prev: Re: mains transformers
• Next: Protecting a potential transformer
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread