Page Contents |
This was the first and largest of the coils tested.
Yes, I realize all these numbers and calculations are boring, but this engineering notebook includes all my raw data to permit an independent check of the calculations and conclusions later.
See the Projectiles page for details of these projectiles.
MeasurementsThe raw measurements are shown in red in the table below, using horizontal ballistics measurements. |
|||||
Projectile: |
A |
C |
D |
F |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length: | 3.5" | 2.5" | 2" | 1.5" | |
| Mass: | 4.301 g | 2.163 g | 1.464 g | 0.7345 g | |
Potential energy (joules) |
Charge (volts) |
Horiz Distance (inches) |
Horiz Distance (inches) |
Horiz Distance (inches) |
Horiz Distance (inches) |
| 0.6 J | 10 v | 23" | - | - | - |
| 2.4 | 20 | 51 | 58 | - | - |
| 5.4 | 30 | 75 | 98 | 104 | 114 |
| 9.6 | 40 | 97 | 108 | 121 | 132 |
| 15.0 | 50 | 107 | 125 | 137 | 138 |
| 33.8 | 75 | 140 | - | - | - |
| 60.0 | 100 | 155 | - | - | - |
VelocityUsing the equations for horizontal ballistics and the raw data, the velocity is calculated for each of the measurements above. The computed velocity is shown in red. |
|||||
Projectile: |
A |
C |
D |
F |
|
Potential energy (joules) |
Charge (volts) |
Velocity (m/s) |
Velocity (m/s) |
Velocity (m/s) |
Velocity (m/s) |
| 0.6 J | 10 v | 1.316 | - | - | - |
| 2.4 | 20 | 2.919 | 3.319 | - | - |
5.4 |
30 | 4.292 | 5.609 | 5.952 | 6.524 |
| 9.6 | 40 | 5.551 | 6.181 | 6.925 | 7.554 |
| 15.0 | 50 | 6.124 | 7.154 | 7.840 | 7.898 |
| 33.8 | 75 | 8.012 | - | - | - |
| 60.0 | 100 | 8.871 | - | - | - |
EfficiencyCalculate efficiency as shown in red. |
|||||
Projectile: |
A |
C |
D |
F |
|
Potential energy (joules) |
Charge (volts) |
Efficiency (%) |
Efficiency (%) |
Efficiency (%) |
Efficiency (%) |
| 0.6 J | 10 v | 0.6 % | - | - | - |
| 2.4 | 20 | 0.8 | 0.5 | - | - |
| 5.4 | 30 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| 9.6 | 40 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| 15.0 | 50 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 |
| 33.8 | 75 | 0.4 | - | - | - |
| 60.0 | 100 | 0.3 | - | - | - |

This coil with 97 turns measured 8 ms half-cycle waveform. The image below indicates peak currents of 350 A at 100v charge.

The speeds and efficiencies are very low. We need to shorten the time and increase the peak current.
From the oscilloscope, the half-cycle time is 8 ms, and we desire our next coil to be 25% faster, which means a 6 ms discharge time.
Using a Java RLC simulator, we find the estimated inductance is L = 525 uH for an 8 ms discharge with a 12,000 uF capacitor.
To reduce this to 6 ms, a Java LC Time Simulator finds that inductance should be reduced to a value of 304 uH.
We don’t want to model an iron-core coil in FEM to derive the inductance, so let’s apply the same ratio change to an air-core model. This is much easier to do, and the next bench test will tell us if this method is accurate.
Last update June 23, 2007 by Barry Hansen ©2007