Re: DRSSTC vs OLTC?

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Marco,

At 01:36 AM 4/21/2005, you wrote:
> Hello Solid State guys,
>
> Please excuse my naive question, but what is the difference between OLTC
> (Off Line TC?) and DRSSTC (Double Resonance Solid State TC?)?
>
> Aren't they both running off-line, with an half or full-bridge drive,
> IGBTs or FETs, feeding directly the primary?

The OLTC charges a big capacitor directly off AC line voltage.  For 120VAC 
input, that is 170V  By pulsing at 120Hz with a line inductor, you can 
resonant that to ~340V.  Many use a big DC power supplies to charge the 
primary cap too.  But the voltage is low so the IGBTs can handle it.

The key to the OLTC is that the primary cap is charged to a set voltage at 
say 300V.  Then it is discharged though a very low inductance primary 
(often less than 1uH!) to make enormous primary currents.  Even with just 
one turn on the primary, the coupling is still very good.  So rather than 
using high voltage to force big primary currents, the OLTC uses low voltage 
but into a very low inductance to produce similar high primary 
currents.  The current is usually higher but does not last as long.  The 
OLTC uses big IGBTS or ten small ones (me) to switch the high 
current.  Reverse diodes complete the circuit during the other half of the 
cycle.

The DRSSTC's primary, secondary, and primary cap are all very normal.  But 
the gap and charging circuit, are replaced by a high current H-bridge that 
feeds the primary inductor and capacitor with a +- 300V square wave at the 
Fo frequency at say 500 amps.  That rings the primary voltages up to almost 
normal say 15000 Volt levels.  Even though the primary inductor and cap 
voltages are high, the low impedance ground based driver voltages stay at 
about +-340V so it is just almost normal IGBT switching electronics.


> Drive timing comes from current, voltage or whatever feedback, with
> mixed-logic or microcontroller aid, right?

We let the H-bridge timing be run off the primary current.  A natural LC 
"tuning fork".  Basically just a circuit to detect which direction the 
primary current is going and pump more current into it.  It automatically 
runs at the primary systems Fo frequency.  The bridge switches to the 
opposite direction whenever the primary current naturally reverses.  There 
are also systems that use the secondary voltage picked up by an antenna to 
do basically the same thing.  But primary current timing seems to be 
gaining favor.


> So besides the flexibility of drive timing, what are the main
> differences (circuital and performance) between them?

The old "gap losses" are gone!!
The drive weighs 20 pounds.  The whole coil system weighs 35 pounds!!
It seems about 50% more efficient.
It can run continuously "forever".
There are no moving parts or parts that wear out.
Drive timing can eliminate the need for a variac.

The OLTC is a bit more reliable and forgiving, but the DRSSTC easily out 
performs it.  I think OLTCs are at 6 foot and the DRSSTC are at 13 foot 
streamers!!  These are not the old wimpy solid state machines at 
all!!!  The DRSSTC can hold its own against any spark gap coil and the OLTC 
is frighteningly fierce!!

The OLTC has fairly high losses in it's high current low voltage primary 
system and it's power is fixed for each bang.  Thus, it's performance 
suffers.  The DRSSTC's primary system has lower loss due the high voltage 
and higher impedances and can continually supply energy during the 
bang.  Thus, it runs VERY well!!!

Unlike the OLTC, DRSSTC's are well documented :o))

www.drsstc.com

No two people seem to have made very similar DRSSTCs so far!  There is a 
lot yet to be figured out!!  The DRSSTC's firing timing can be controlled 
from uS to uS for super high control.  The possibilities there are yet to 
be dreamed of!!

If your want to build one.  The OLTC is technically simpler, but the DRSSTC 
is far better if you can do the more complex electronics.  In your case, 
that would be no problem.

Cheers,

        Terry


> I'd really like to see a quick recap about these two solutions.
>
> Regards