[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Equi-drive vs. standard drive, was SGTC



Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi John,

I remember when you did these experiments. Do you remember the circuit hook up?

Take care,
Bart

Tesla list wrote:

Original poster: FutureT@xxxxxxx
In a message dated 4/28/07 1:35:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:

I understand that, and  I agree with the point WRT "Case 2" being better than
"Case 1". But why does  "Case 3" behave any differently from "Case  2"?
FWIW, Richard Hulls notes  indicate that "Case 3", the "Equi-Drive", is
definitely preferable. This was a  setup that Tesla advocated.
However, Hull wrote
that the "Equi-Drive" system was  more prone to leave a charge on the primary
cap without bleed down. Again, I  don't see why.


-Phil LaBudde



Phil,

I did various comparisons of case 2 and case 3.  There was no
measureable difference in performance.  I also don't see why
there should be any difference.  Case 3 definitely tended to leave
dangerous charges on the primary caps.  I think it's because of
the inductive primary being situated (floating) between the two caps.

John


**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.