Re: MMC cap preferences? (fwd)

["High Voltage list" <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: <sroys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:15:32 -0700
From: Gomez Addams <gomez@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: MMC cap preferences? (fwd)


On Mar 10, 2005, at 8:45 PM, High Voltage list wrote:

> Original poster: <sroys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 21:35:55 -0600
> From: Shaun Epp <scepp@xxxxxxx>
> To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: MMC cap preferences? (fwd)
>
> The prefered capacitors have metal foil instead of metallized plates, 
> they
> can hadle more current.

  Hmm, Ross Overstreet says metallized film is better than metal foil 
due to its "self healing" properties.  You and Terry say that metal 
foil is better due to increased current capability.

So, who's right, or is this one of those religious arguments that may 
never be settled?


> Also those caps from newark are very small capacitance.  The ones most 
> popular are made by Cornell Dubilier, they are 0.15 uF at 2000 VDC, 
> part number 942C20P15K.

I didn't know about those C-D caps, clearly they are superior.

>   They can be purchased though
> Richardson Electronics, www.rell.com , in quantities of 28.  Dr 
> Resonance
> was selling them too, but apparently he's not well,  I'm not sure if 
> his
> company still sells them.

Uh-oh, anybody know what's going on with Mr. Cox's health?

...........................................................
The problem with using bleeding edge technology is that the
blood that winds up on the floor is usually your own.