Re: Another MMC question...

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "RIAA/MPAA's Worst Nightmare" <mike.marcum-at-zoomtown-dot-com> 

I would stick with the CD 943c caps. No point in wasting time/money on a cap
that may or may not work.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 5:52 PM
Subject: Another MMC question...


 > Original poster: Koen van den Berg <cerberus_rex-at-planet.nl>
 >
 > Hi there everybody,
 >
 > I have yet another question about my MMC. After laboriously making a very
 > eye-pleasing and neatly soldered MMC with my 100 caps (see my last
question
 > for details) I do believe I know whether or not the concept works. You
see,
 > it doesn't. More than twelve caps went up in smoke (ruining my Lexan!),
 > which made me realise that these were indeed not suitable for TC use. So
 > it's back to the drawing board. I still have one relatively inexpensive
 > option. I can use 23 Farnell 440 VAC 680 nF caps in series to get 10120
VAC
 > total string voltage and 29.5 total capacitance. These are polypropylene
 > capacitors, and they should be suited for TC use, based on info from the
 > data sheet. However, there is one thing that could be a problem: the caps
 > are rated at 250 V/us max! I read somewhere that I shouldn't use these for
 > an MMC, as only capacitors rated at 1000 V/us will suffice. Will using
 > these caps result in absolute failure or more Lexan destruction, or can
 > will it still be better than what I am using now (which is a very large
 > ceramic capacitor MMC)? Please help...
 > Thanks in advance & happy coiling,
 >
 > Koen
 >
 >