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

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

To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Equi-drive vs. standard drive, was SGTC
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 23:36:09 -0600
Delivered-to: testla@xxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Old-return-path: <tcmlmod@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-date: Tue, 1 May 2007 23:34:51 -0600 (MDT)
Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Resent-message-id: <piwTXQoavvO.A.m_.7LCOGB@chip1>
Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx

Original poster: Slurp812 <slurp812@xxxxxxxxx>

OK, consider the transformer as a short and the primary as a short.
What you have then is 2 caps in parallel, with no discharge path. you
could have 1000 volts on the primary, and 0 in the transformer.



Yet again, I *still* don't understand why there's a  difference with the
"Equidrive". The two caps are tied together by the primary,  and the
transformer's
secondary completes the circuit.

Prev by Date: Re: Equi-drive vs. standard drive, was SGTC
Next by Date: Re: Equdrive circuit, was Re: SGTC
Previous by thread: Re: Equi-drive vs. standard drive, was SGTC
Next by thread: Re: Equi-drive vs. standard drive, was SGTC
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread