Variation on DRSSTC
Sulaiman, Tue May 22 2007, 05:10PMI'm both busy and lazy at the moment, so I shall not get round to trying this idea for quite a while,
but I thought it may interrest some of you.
Imagine a half-bridge drsstc, output via Cp then Lp to ground
Now imagine output via 0.1 x Cp to 0.9 x Cp in parallel with Lp
For a given voltage across Lp the bridge output current would be 1/10th the usual.
Allowing massive primary VAR with relatively low current transistors.
The idea can easily be extended to two small capacitors from the outputs of a full-bridge to the main Cp//Lp.
If you try please post results.
Re: Variation on DRSSTC
ShawnLG, Wed May 23 2007, 04:52AM
I have done this with my micro DRSSTC. The spark length was not as great with this setup. The smaller the series capacitor in relation with the parrellel capacitor lessens the spark length. The reason is that the streamers drain a lot of the energy from the tank.
ShawnLG, Wed May 23 2007, 04:52AM
I have done this with my micro DRSSTC. The spark length was not as great with this setup. The smaller the series capacitor in relation with the parrellel capacitor lessens the spark length. The reason is that the streamers drain a lot of the energy from the tank.
Re: Variation on DRSSTC
colin heath, Wed May 23 2007, 07:03AM
Hi,
Vasil has done something very similar except the second LC network is not attached to the first. You will find it on his site and he had good results.
Cheers
Colin
colin heath, Wed May 23 2007, 07:03AM
Hi,
Vasil has done something very similar except the second LC network is not attached to the first. You will find it on his site and he had good results.
Cheers
Colin
Re: Variation on DRSSTC
Steve Conner, Wed May 23 2007, 11:24AM
The bottom line is that it takes real power to make sparks, and the faster you can deliver energy from the DC bus capacitor to the discharge terminal (ie, higher peak power) the bigger and more efficient your spark production will be.
Fiddling with tapped capacitors and tertiary windings really just affects reactive power flow, to deliver energy quicker you need a bigger inverter.
Steve Conner, Wed May 23 2007, 11:24AM
The bottom line is that it takes real power to make sparks, and the faster you can deliver energy from the DC bus capacitor to the discharge terminal (ie, higher peak power) the bigger and more efficient your spark production will be.
Fiddling with tapped capacitors and tertiary windings really just affects reactive power flow, to deliver energy quicker you need a bigger inverter.
Re: Variation on DRSSTC
JimmyH, Tue May 29 2007, 12:19AM
There's no free lunch. As conner said, you need real power to create real sparks, and this setup would reduce the amount of power it could handle.
The switching loss would also be horrific, since you have a purely capacitive path to ground, and you're driving it with a square wave. Instead, you could do a LCLR type deal, so you don't have the switching loss, but the the first point still holds.
JimmyH, Tue May 29 2007, 12:19AM
There's no free lunch. As conner said, you need real power to create real sparks, and this setup would reduce the amount of power it could handle.
The switching loss would also be horrific, since you have a purely capacitive path to ground, and you're driving it with a square wave. Instead, you could do a LCLR type deal, so you don't have the switching loss, but the the first point still holds.
Print this page