<WAS> Building A VTTC <NOW> SGTC BPS Counter

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Sparktron01@xxxxxxxxxxx 

Cameron, Steve

I would think that basic circuit could be used for a BPS counter for
a SGTC using a ASRSG or SG.  Clock frequency would be basically
look for a RF "burst" and output a non-retriggered pulse from a
74121,74123 as a clock output for the counter in this basic circuit.

Could also be used for a pulse counter for the various DRSSTC, SSTC
gated SSTC (new nomenclatures, acronyms not heard of yet  #%^$ )
HV pulsed systems.  I would use 3 7 segment displays (to count to
effectively 999 pps), instead of 199.  (That's pretty optimistic for a 1971
Datsun B210   ;^D )

Actually a pretty clever circuit... ummmmh   :^D

Regards
Dave Sharpe, TCBOR/HEAS
Chesterfield, VA. USA

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Original poster: "Steve Ward" <steve.ward@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Since the pulse rate is always some even division of 60, its pretty
> easy to listen to hear the 30, 20, 15, and 10pps.  Below that you may
> need a counter.  Most people have scopes or maybe a meter that can
> count, i dont think i would bother putting a counter circuit into the
> staccato controller.
>
> Steve
>
> On 8/21/06, Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Original poster: "Cameron B. Prince" <cplists@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> >Hey guys,
> >
> >I think the consensus is we need some sort of counter to help determine the
> >current pulse rate of the staccato controller. John, this is what I had
> >emailed you about a few weeks ago. I think it would be really nice to
> >incorporate two 7 segment displays into the controller that display current
> >pulses per second. I have briefly looked into this and found the schematic
> >here:
> >
> >http://martybugs.net/electronics/speedo.cgi
> >
> >It's for a digital speedometer display but I think the concept is about the
> >same:
> >
> >1) Take a sample
> >2) Perform an average
> >3) Display value
> >4) Return to step 1
> >
> >What are your thoughts on this circuit and adapting it to 
interface with the
> >staccato controller? Is there a less complex way or circuit that would
> >provide the same results that you know of?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Cameron
> >
> >  > -----Original Message-----
> >  > From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla@xxxxxxxxxx]
> >  > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 6:58 PM
> >  > To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> >  > Subject: Re: Building A VTTC
> >  >
> >  > Original poster: FutureT@xxxxxxx
> >  >
> >  > In a message dated 8/21/06 4:07:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> >  > tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> >  >
> >  > >It seems that you have made a quantum leap in
> >  > >the stacatto controlled VTTC that probably hasn't been pa-
> >  > >ralleled since the 1990s when John Freau himself first intro-
> >  > >duced the stacatto controlled VTTC, capitalizing upon the
> >  > >higher output from the same power input through the
> >  > >priciple of lower duty cycle firing. And I also think that it
> >  > >should be pointed out to the rest of the list that this is your
> >  > >very first VTTC project, so basically you've made these
> >  > >advances as a VTTC beginner!
> >  > >
> >  > >Keep up the good work,
> >  > >David
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Cameron, David,
> >  >
> >  > Yes, Cameron has obtained very impressive results from his
> >  > VTTC project.
> >  >
> >  > My original coil that gave the 36" sparks, and later
> >  > the one that gave 38" sparks didn't have a staccato system
> >  > attached, so they ran at 60 PPS, and drew a lot of power.
> >  > These early designs were unable to give the straight sword-like
> >  > sparks, so the sparks tended to get a lot shorter when the
> >  > staccato feature was added.  I did at some point add the
> >  > staccato feature but the sparks got shorter when the staccato
> >  > was operating.
> >  >
> >  > One of my early coils gave the sword-like sparks.  In this
> >  > coil the spark length did not decrease in the staccato mode.
> >  > I could reduce the pulse rate to 1 pulse per minute, and the
> >  > sparks remained just as long.  But this was a smaller coil
> >  > which produced 20" sparks from a single 4-250A tube
> >  >
> >  > When I added the staccato system to my coils in general
> >  > I didn't go back to modify the coils to take advantage of the
> >  > staccato features, so the sparks didn't get any longer, the
> >  > input power simply decreased.
> >  >
> >  > When I had spoken to
> >  > Steve Ward and others, I suggested that they modify their coils
> >  > (compared to mine) by lowering the plate impedance to take
> >  > advantage of the staccato capabilities.  This is what I was planning
> >  > to do but I got involved in other work.  Also around that time I had
> >  > introduced the zero-crossing staccato circuit which helped a lot for
> >  > staccato stability.  I sent this schematic to Steve Ward and he
> >  > incorporated it into his coil and placed the schematic at his
> >  > website.  He did optimize his coils to take advantage of the
> >  > staccato, by lowering the plate impedance.  Cameron has
> >  > done that also.
> >  >
> >  > Some later coils that I built did give the sword-like
> >  > sparks, so they were able to maintain their spark lengths
> >  > while running at a slower staccato pulse rate.  One later design
> >  > coil (circa Feb, 2001) produced 24" swordlike sparks in the
> >  > staccato mode and also without staccato.  This coil used two
> >  > 833A tubes and was capable of running without staccato
> >  > without overheating the tubes.  It produced 24" sparks.
> >  > When running without staccato it drew 2400 watts while
> >  > producing the 24" sparks.  By using the staccato, the
> >  > power draw could be dramatically reduced depending
> >  > on the pulse rate.  For example if the coil was run at 30 PPS,
> >  > Then it drew 1200 watts (somewhere around 10amps).  If the
> >  > coil was run at 15 PPS, then it drew 600 watts (~ 5 amps).
> >  >
> >  > I use a similar formula to my formula for spark gap coils,
> >  > for VTTC's without staccato.
> >  >
> >  >       spark length inches = 0.5*sqrt input watts.
> >  >
> >  > This formula is for VTTC's which are running at the full 60 PPS
> >  > (no staccato).  The coils will of course be much more "efficient"
> >  > in staccato mode.
> >  >
> >  > As an example there is my 2nd large VTTC coil which gave the
> >  > 36" sparks at around 5500 watts.  So if we take the sqrt of
> >  > 5500 = 74.16.  Then multiplying this by 0.5 gives 37" which is
> >  > very close to the 36" I obtained.  I think I turned up the power
> >  > a little higher to get the 38" which I eventually obtained.
> >  >
> >  > Now we can do an example with staccato mode.  Consider
> >  > my coil that gave 24" sparks both in or out of staccato mode.
> >  >
> >  > without staccato:
> >  >
> >  >     24.49" spark length = 0.5*sqrt 2400 watts
> >  >
> >  > So it can be seen the formula is quite accurate for this coil also.
> >  >
> >  >    But with staccato at 20 PPS the formula must be modified.
> >  >
> >  >    24" spark length = 0.76*sqrt 1000 watts
> >  >
> >  > note I used 1000 watts instead of 800 watts to allow for the
> >  > filament power for the two tubes.  In some of the calcs here
> >  > I didn't bother accounting for filament power.
> >  >
> >  >    At 15 PPS:
> >  >
> >  >    24" spark length = 0.86*sqrt 800 watts
> >  >
> >  > I think at some particular slow pulse rate
> >  > the spark length diminished some.  I'm not sure though.
> >  > If the staccato pulse rate
> >  > is very slow, the spark will not appear continuous but will
> >  > appear pulsed when viewed by eye.  When speaking about
> >  > the efficiency of a staccato tube coil, it's best to give the
> >  > staccato pulse rate because the pulse rate has such a
> >  > dramatic effect on the power draw.  When the coil runs
> >  > at 30 PPS, the sparks look almost as full as at 60 PPS.
> >  > At 20 PPS the sparks look good too.  Each pulse rate
> >  > has it's own interesting appearance and sound.  When
> >  > the rate gets slow enough, down to 15 PPS or so, only
> >  > a single sword like spark will be seen.  This sword spark
> >  > will waver back and forth slightly as the coil runs.  This
> >  > type of spark can be seen at my website, as well as
> >  > other types of sparks.
> >  >
> >  > Basically if you optimize the VTTC for staccato, then it will
> >  > not be able to run continuously without staccato.  The tubes
> >  > will overheat.  So there's a tradeoff.  Either use a high plate
> >  > impedance and permit the coil to run at the full 60 PPS
> >  > (no staccato), and limit the spark length (even with staccato
> >  > turned on).   Or use a lower plate impedance and only
> >  > run in the staccato mode at 30 PPS or less to prevent the
> >  > tube from burning up.  But longer sparks will be obtained.
> >  > The coil can be turned up to full power without staccato
> >  > for short durations, but not continuously.  Keep an eye
> >  > on the tube plate and watch for excessive redness.  Turn
> >  > down the power very quickly as needed.
> >  >
> >  > John
> >  >
> >
> >
>
>
>