From: Bert Hickman
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 09:52:10 -0500
Subject: Re: [TSSP] F A N T C: - It's NEW! - and needs some TSSP input
Bart, Paul and all, This is one accurate and very POWERFUL program - congratulations Bart and Paul! Also, thanks for your persistence in fighting browser and java problems! A browser update: Going to Netscape 7.0 doesn't seem to help! Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get FANTC to run until this morning. I installed Netscape 7.0 on Saturday (great program, BTW!). Unfortunately, it apparently doesn't like FANTC, so I wasn't able to do any real testing until today. I saw similar behavior as Kurt and Stefan when trying to run either the online or downloaded versions. My system uses Win ME, running on a 1.3 GHz P4 with 512 MB RAM. Using Netscape 7.0, I got very sluggish responses using either FANTC version x.6 or x.7. This was the same for either the on-line or downloaded versions. Response to get to the "Computing... please wait" screen was about 60 seconds. But the real problem was that I was not able to get FANTC to run to completion under Netscape 7.0, and it didn't even bring up the script warning... :^( Paul's GeoTC Test Script did at least run on Netscape 7.0, but again, it's as though it's in "slow motion". Had to clear the familiar script warnings (about 10 times along the way) but it did finally did chug through the tests... :^) However, when I tried reverting back to Netscape 4.7, everything became much "snappier". The "computing" screen came right up, and the demos ran cleanly in both on-line and downloaded modes, with no script warnings. When I ran Paul's GeoTC Test Script, the calculation times were about 1/3 that seen under Netscape 7.0. Using FANTC x.7 in Netscape 4.7, I was able to finally run a comparison test on my system! The predicted versus actual results for inductances and coefficient of coupling agree very nicely - in fact they're virtually spot on! However, I haven't added in the room's wall and ceiling parameters - this may partially explain the somewhat larger deviation in Fo (about 2.6% higher). Measured values: ================ Lpri = 193 uH Lsec = 73.5 mH k = 0.208 (reverse calculated from F1 and F2 vs Fo) Fo = 91.6 kHz Using Level 2 analysis: ======================= Running F A N T C version x.7 using core functions of G E O T C version: 2.0 Primary Inductance (L1): 191.09 uH Run Complete Time elapsed: 4.1 secs Secondary Inductance (L2): 73.64 mH Run Complete Time elapsed: 3.4 secs Mutual Inductance (L1,L2): 770.04 uH Coupling Coefficient(K): .205 Run Complete Time elapsed: 11.6 secs Secondary Resonant Frequency: 93.99 kHz V/I prifile data with corresponding secondary length fragments.... S, V, I 0.00, 0.00, 1.00 0.01, 338.52, 1.01 0.03, 1209.49, 1.03 0.06, 3445.73, 1.04 0.06, 5957.41, 1.05 0.06, 8626.09, 1.06 0.06, 11388.03, 1.06 0.06, 14204.32, 1.06 0.06, 17048.81, 1.06 0.06, 19902.39, 1.05 0.06, 22749.78, 1.04 0.06, 25577.66, 1.04 0.06, 28373.28, 1.02 0.06, 31123.12, 1.01 0.06, 33811.13, 1 0.06, 36415.98, .98 0.06, 38905.83, .96 0.06, 41227.63, .95 0.06, 43280.02, .93 0.03, 44077.03, .91 0.01, 44388.72, .9 Energy Storage Inductance (Lee): 76.82 mH Effective Series Inductance (Les): 75.17 mH Low Frequency Inductance (Ldc): 73.64 mH Energy Storage Capacitance (Cee): 38.22 pF Effective Shunt Capacitance (Ces): 38.41 pF Low Frequency Capacitance (Cdc): 53.8 pF Total Topload Capacitance (Ctop): 30.89 pF Run Complete Time elapsed: 104.5 secs Thanks again, and best regards, -- Bert -- -- Bert Hickman Stoneridge Engineering "Electromagically" (TM) Shrunken Coins! http://www.teslamania.com Kurt Schraner wrote: > Hi Paul, Stefan, Bart, > > it did't change affairs, when starting the test of GEOTC from Netscape > 6, as reported by Stefan as well. I was getting results for the first 3 > tests however, and continued the online calc's for 1.5hours more. By > then I was no more able to read the results, because the Netscape > Browser got blocked, and had to be restarted, as also reported by > Stefan. But I had never to restart the whole PC (When I wrote > Cltrl-Alt-Del in my former mail, it means, this was only used to enter > the task manager screen of Windows...thougt, this might have led to some > misunderstanding). BTW, I'm running Windows 2000 release 5.00.2195 > (german). > > Well, that was about trying online. But another way was leading me to > make my first successful trials with FANTC: just by downloading the zip > from Bart's site. I was able to run some tests by using IE6, and NOT to > abort the Java, when the well known warning-message occured (in fact I > got really short calculation times, i.e. about 11sec's for the first and > ~22sec's for the second-last tests). Have to try it now on real coils. > > Oddly enough, the same was not the case, when using Netscape 6: the > offline activation of FANTC was showing the same problems, as in online > use: long time >200s till first display of "system computing", and >1h > time without further results visible. This might lead to the conclusion, > the problem beeing tied to how the browser deals with Java and > Java-script, and probably not the operating system? (BTW: Marco, with > best performance, is using Win 2000 as well). > > Thank you for help, trying to resolve these problems. > Cheers, Kurt > > Paul wrote: > >> Kurt, >> >> I made up a test page without the Java plotting and >> drawing stuff. Maybe this will do better. >> >> http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tssp/geotc/ks.html >> >> -- >> Paul Nicholson, >> -- >> > > >
Maintainer Paul Nicholson, paul@abelian.demon.co.uk.