Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Electronic Schematics (alt.binaries.schematics.electronic) A place to show and share your electronics schematic drawings. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div ...... Phil |
#2
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:25:35 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote: ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div ..... Phil Pretty nice if all that is needed to excite the gas are the peaks. You mention units per division, but no divisions are visible. Looks like the cut-off source makes light with less power. What brands of lamp? |
#3
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
"Mr.Eko" ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Pretty nice if all that is needed to excite the gas are the peaks. ** So you have no idea what a " CFL " is ? You mention units per division, but no divisions are visible. ** Yes they are. **** off - IMBECILE |
#4
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:11:06 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote: "Mr.Eko" ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Pretty nice if all that is needed to excite the gas are the peaks. ** So you have no idea what a " CFL " is ? You mention units per division, but no divisions are visible. ** Yes they are. **** off - IMBECILE You couldn't get any worse, idiot. Yes, I know what the device under discussion is, and it is YOU that is the imbecile. Mainly because you wouldn't know how to respond to anyone if you tried. You are sub-human scum. Even Roy and Proteus are better than a dope like you, Phil. And no, you do not have the brains many here tout you as having. The main reason being your abject inability to make a proper response. You take idiocy to an all time new low. I hope you feel good about yourself. You really are a sad case. All the blank lines after the CRAP you post is another reason that you are stupid. |
#5
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
In article ,
"Phil Allison" wrote: Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div ..... Phil What is your 'normal' supply? If it does this on ‰ 0.5 A it's got some problems. The tail on the current wave is LT 0.1 A The last time I saw a 'flat' topped AC supply wave, it was because the experimenter had set the wrong range on the recording device and the wave was clipped. Also, could it be that your normal supply has a heavy 3rd harmonic load? (I retired before harmonics on the neutral became an issue so I've never seen this type of distortion from a wall outlet but I imagine that it could exist somewhere.) -- Fred Lotte |
#6
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
Phil Allison wrote: ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. You've got a serious case of 'flat topping' there. What's the THD ? Graham |
#7
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:25:35 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:
** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div How did you get the clean AC, Phil? I'm assuming that the blip on the voltage waveform where the CFL fires is because the supply isn't of a low enough impedance, so is it from the output of an amplifier, stepped up through a step-up transformer? Your mains supply looks rubbish! Are you on the end of a long feed? Nice pics, by the way. -- Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!) Web: http://www.nascom.info Filtering everything posted from googlegroups to kill spam. |
#8
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
"mick" Phil Allison wrote: ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div How did you get the clean AC, Phil? I'm assuming that the blip on the voltage waveform where the CFL fires is because the supply isn't of a low enough impedance, so is it from the output of an amplifier, stepped up through a step-up transformer? ** Yep. I used a 600 watt mosfet amp driving a 300VA toroidal in reverse, fed from my bench sine generator set to 50 Hz. Your mains supply looks rubbish! ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? Are you on the end of a long feed? ** In the heart of Sydney's inner suburbs. ....... Phil |
#9
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:07:16 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote: "mick" Phil Allison wrote: ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div How did you get the clean AC, Phil? I'm assuming that the blip on the voltage waveform where the CFL fires is because the supply isn't of a low enough impedance, so is it from the output of an amplifier, stepped up through a step-up transformer? ** Yep. I used a 600 watt mosfet amp driving a 300VA toroidal in reverse, fed from my bench sine generator set to 50 Hz. Your mains supply looks rubbish! ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? Are you on the end of a long feed? ** In the heart of Sydney's inner suburbs. ...... Phil Same bulb, but I'd bet that your "pure sine wave" drive actually consumes more power. |
#10
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:07:16 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote: "mick" Phil Allison wrote: ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div How did you get the clean AC, Phil? I'm assuming that the blip on the voltage waveform where the CFL fires is because the supply isn't of a low enough impedance, so is it from the output of an amplifier, stepped up through a step-up transformer? ** Yep. I used a 600 watt mosfet amp driving a 300VA toroidal in reverse, fed from my bench sine generator set to 50 Hz. Your mains supply looks rubbish! ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? Are you on the end of a long feed? ** In the heart of Sydney's inner suburbs. ...... Phil I dont know a lot about transmission line theory, not have i put a lot of thought to it, but why is it so bad? |
#11
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:07:16 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:
snip ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? I just had a look now (2PM on Thursday here, so mostly businesses on the mains). Our waveshape at the moment is fairly clean. Some flat-topping and, perhaps, a bit more triangular than sine! Probably a *bit* better than yours was at the time though. -- Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!) Web: http://www.nascom.info Filtering everything posted from googlegroups to kill spam. |
#12
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:16:29 GMT, mick wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:07:16 +1100, Phil Allison wrote: snip ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? I just had a look now (2PM on Thursday here, so mostly businesses on the mains). Our waveshape at the moment is fairly clean. Some flat-topping and, perhaps, a bit more triangular than sine! Probably a *bit* better than yours was at the time though. I'd love to see some grid waveforms from around the world. Here are 4, all from around the Puget Sound area. There's quite a bit of variation for a relatively small geographic area. |
#13
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
Phil Allison wrote: "mick" Phil Allison wrote: ** Two pics of scope screens for SED Same 23 watt CFL used in each case for current trace. Normal AC supply versus pure sine wave supply. Voltage trace = 100 V per div Current trace =120 mA per div How did you get the clean AC, Phil? I'm assuming that the blip on the voltage waveform where the CFL fires is because the supply isn't of a low enough impedance, so is it from the output of an amplifier, stepped up through a step-up transformer? ** Yep. I used a 600 watt mosfet amp driving a 300VA toroidal in reverse, fed from my bench sine generator set to 50 Hz. Almost exactly what I did for *measuring* harmonics on EUT. Your mains supply looks rubbish! ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? I certainly have. It's not as bad as that. Do you have a THD figure ? Graham |
#14
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
The Real Andy wrote: I dont know a lot about transmission line theory, not have i put a lot of thought to it, but why is it so bad? It's nothing to do with transmission line theory. It's the combination of supply source impedance and non-linear loads like capacitor input filter DC supplies. The current is drawn only over somewhere between (typically) 2 and 3.5 ms of a 10 ms 1/2 cycle. The effect is called 'flat-topping'. EN61000-3-2 addresses it and much new equipment must correct for the harmonic content of the current it draws, slightly erroneously usually called PFC (power factor correction ). Graham |
#15
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
The Phantom wrote: On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:16:29 GMT, mick wrote: On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:07:16 +1100, Phil Allison wrote: ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? I just had a look now (2PM on Thursday here, so mostly businesses on the mains). Our waveshape at the moment is fairly clean. Some flat-topping and, perhaps, a bit more triangular than sine! Probably a *bit* better than yours was at the time though. I'd love to see some grid waveforms from around the world. Here are 4, all from around the Puget Sound area. There's quite a bit of variation for a relatively small geographic area. Number 1 looks very clean but there's some strange waveform distortion in there. 3 and 4 are more typical of what I'd expect to see widely.. Graham |
#16
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
"The Phantom" wrote in message ... On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:16:29 GMT, mick wrote: On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:07:16 +1100, Phil Allison wrote: snip ** Fraid the same wave shape is almost universal. Ever checked your local AC power voltage wave shape ? I just had a look now (2PM on Thursday here, so mostly businesses on the mains). Our waveshape at the moment is fairly clean. Some flat-topping and, perhaps, a bit more triangular than sine! Probably a *bit* better than yours was at the time though. I'd love to see some grid waveforms from around the world. Here are 4, all from around the Puget Sound area. There's quite a bit of variation for a relatively small geographic area. Pic from a couple of years ago. Still same 5 minutes ago. NB: your Pics #3 and #4, look to have that characteristic non linear crossover distortion seen at the secondaries of low voltage step down transformers ??. |
#17
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
|
|||
|
|||
Same CFL, different power
"john jardine" NB: your Pics #3 and #4, look to have that characteristic non linear crossover distortion seen at the secondaries of low voltage step down transformers ??. ** Entirely due to magnetising current peaks in the primary occurring 90 degrees later than the voltage peaks. These current peaks briefly drop the effective primary voltage and create the waveform distortion seen at the secondary. The effect is pretty much limited to small e-core jobs - less than 50VA. ...... Phil |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Deteriorated Power Line Coming into House from Power Meter | Home Repair | |||
HP/Agilent E3632A programmable power supply has power up failure (solution) | Electronics Repair | |||
Running 120v small power tool on UK 230v power (with pics) | Electronics Repair | |||
__________ Samsung TXG2746 power cycling on power up.... | Electronics Repair | |||
X-Box power surge - blew out switching power supply | Electronics Repair |