Re: MMD (not another acronym!)

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: MMD (not another acronym!)
• From: "Jim Lux" <jimlux-at-jpl.nasa.gov> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
• Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 16:08:31 -0700
• Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
• Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

More comments

I would NOT use a parallel RC network.  The R's actually make life worse.  A
better strategy is just to overdesign by 50% (i.e. for a 20 kV rectifier,
use 30 1 kV diodes).

The C's are there to suppress transients and to absorb any variations in
reverse recovery time.  I don't use them, but others do.


http://www.vcnet-dot-com/measures/D.amplifiers.3.html has some words about this
in the context of ham radio tube power amps



-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Date: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 5:13 AM
Subject: MMD (not another acronym!)


>Original Poster: "Mike Nolley" <mnolley-at-mail.slc.edu>
>

>    My second question is, how much should the MMD be over-rated--*given*
the
>use of an R-C network (which I presume any diode-user would need by
default).
>     Multi-string MMD's seem to be impractical for size reasons, and silly
to
>boot as the 1kv, 6A diodes would seem to be sufficient for any system under
84
>kva ; )
>      Thanks for any, and all responses.
>                    --Mike
>
>
>

• Prev: Re: MMD (not another acronym!)
• Next: Topaz line noise surppressing transformers
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread