Re: Sync 200BPS improvement, (short post !)

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Sync 200BPS improvement, (short post !)
From: Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 17:14:02 -0600
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme
In-Reply-To: <2ab81e74.24c9ff16-at-aol-dot-com>

At 01:23 PM 7/23/99 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 99-07-23 05:46:29 EDT, you write:
>
>
Snip....
>I think maybe non-sync operation ruins the power
>factor in general? (due to the chaotic and unstable inductive kicking
>and bucking)    :)
>
>Cheers,
>John Freau
>

Hi John,

	While working on MMC RMS current calculations, I ran into this.  Sync gaps
are always able to fire at the high point of the AC cycle so they waste
very little available power.  However, non sync gaps are firing at random
places on the AC cycle.  Thus they are very often firing at less than
optimal voltage.  I ran some calculations on this and found that a 120BPS
asynchronous gap will only deliver 1/2 the power of a 120 BPS sync gap due
to hitting at less than the optimal time.  I use a power correction factor
that is 1 for a sync gap and 1/2 for a non-sync gap in MMC calculations to
account for this.  In order to recover this lost power with a non-sync gap,
you need to run at 240 BPS or higher.  Of course, in that case, you need a
more powerful charging circuit than a neon too...  A 120 BPS non-sync gap
appears to be a waste of time given that an equal sync gap will double the
power throughput...

Cheers,

	Terry