[TCML] BPS Testing
Gary.Lau at hp.com
Mon Mar 10 06:33:41 MST 2008
I missed the basic test configuration that you're using. Two 15/30's, but what size cap? Gap geometry? Did the coil perform well? 82 or 70 BPS seems low for a well performing coil.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tesla-bounces at pupman.com [mailto:tesla-bounces at pupman.com] On
> Behalf Of bartb
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 9:11 PM
> To: Tesla Coil Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [TCML] BPS Testing
> Hi All,
> I continued BPS testing today. I paralleled two 15/30's after phasing
> for 15/60 power. I didn't want to change any coil parameters other than
> power and a single 15/30 would have been just too small for the cap
> size. I removed the safety gap and used 120Vac input via switch to keep
> as many variables out of it as possible (no variac, etc.).
> I did have some problems with the pc loosing the usb hardware device. It
> captures data up to the point where the usb hardware device gets lost.
> I'm aware of this problem (as is the manufacturer). I recorded 4.5
> seconds of run time (actually a little more but Excel maxes out at 65000
> rows of data). I probably should have turned down the sample rate. Hind
> Here's a gif image of 15/60 run. Dead time on left of image is the time
> it took me to run in the garage and turn on the coil.
> When I save the csv file, I set the marker just before the first break
> (so data to left is not exported). Here is a picture of the break area
> expaned with no compression.
> The Excel file identifying time stamps and break voltages:
> The raw csv file:
> Ok, Javatc calculated 70 bps for this NST, cap size, gap, etc..
> What I measured were 373 breaks over a time span of 4.542 seconds. So 82
> Seems about right to me. I don't see a large variation in calculation to
> Take care,
More information about the Tesla