His last sentence he said with coils
Thanks bro every bit helps. So I picked up a multimeter. Batt in atty attached. Placed three attys on. One at . 3 .2 .15 . With the prongs on positive and negative I found I was measuring the V sag in the batts. What I'm trying to find is my working voltage or voltage under load. With a 4.2 batt how would I find out how much of that V is actually hitting my coils to get a accurate amp calculation in ohms law. No need for a safety sleal fam I'm not going super sub ohm I'm just looking for accurate way to measure my true working voltage thus giving me more accurate insight into my amps. Placing a atty on top no coils will that show it?I suspect the OP is looking for performance specs in the same way someone would look for slight advantages at the top end of other products (cars, computers, stereo equipment, etc). What we're missing is the OP's M.O. for this, maybe competition?
Anyway, sometimes results can be surprising among batteries. The VTC6, as an example, hits harder than the VTC5A fresh off the charger, and that may be a huge advantage in comps if you don't need the extra amps.
Would that be the equivalent to just putting the multimeter on the positive and negative posts? Or does it work differently? Also where did you pick it up from?
Thank you bro this helps alotYou're doing fine. The most telling measurement is measuring the voltage directly across the coil, or as you put it one lead on each post. The atty may have some resistance but if the atty is any good it should be negligible. If you are using a Kanthal coil the resistance does not change much at all as it heats up. You can measure from the time you fire. You will most likely get an initial voltage and an end voltage (end of vape). The accuracy of the initial reading depends on how fast your meter responds. From this you can calculate the range of wattage delivered to the coil over the vape period. As per above comments, it's always best to calculate using full battery charge for a margin of safety but in an academic sense (and for boredom amusement) you can see the actual power range delivered.
I'm trying to figure it out for accurate information. I live in new Zealand and we are going through a spike in mech mod use. I've found almost everyone will Base thier ohms law calculations on 3.7 with the only answer I'm giving is this will be your actual voltage underload not 4.2. This is not a select community saying it's 3.7 this is a majority saying this. I have no interest in maxing my cell I'm looking for a way to show wether it is or isn't the true working voltage so if on a group page it is asked what to calculate at and someone says 3.7v I have a way to say actually it's higher and here's how to show you it. I'm only seeking out more in depth detail to show others more safety. But who's going to listen to someone who says it's just 4.2v for safety. Then they will listen to everyone else who says it's lower. I hope that clears a few things up as my agenda has been question multiple times on this threadI have 1 question... why are you doing all this? Are you just trying to max out the potential current drawn out of a cell? Personally, I’d be putting all these efforts into finding effective coil builds which produce a good vape, rather than trying to measure something where the answer “4.2v” gives you the safest figure.
We a know there is a huge difference in current with 4.2v compared to 3.7v. If someone is building super sub ohm and basing thier ohms law on 3.7 (and I've seen people Base it even lower) the amount of current they are calculating and thinking it's fine to push it to that level, I want a physical and credible way I can test and show it
Thanks man. The multimeter I was using had alot of delay and would only capture the sag. I'm going to give it one more try with a sparkles one that's alot more expensive to see if it makes a difference as it logs what goes through it to compare differences. Exactly man. I'm just trying to help keep others out and also enjoy the process of getting more knowledge myself along the way. Every bit of advice helps me on my journey. And because it's going on my small YouTube channel I have to be accurate to stay credible. Thanks again famThat's cool. I figured out how to do a quote here. Anyway..... I applaud you for wanting to do this but it will probably become expensive. Just for grins and giggles I tried it with an old Fluke multimeter I kept from my engineering days. By the time the meter caught up with the firing device the initial surge from the battery was long gone. You would probably need a scope. Not cheep. The math alone should tell your friends something. At a .1Ω build 4.2V would draw 42A and 3.7V would draw 37A. Both beyond the constant output capacity of an 18650. I'm sure you would get the argument that the pulse rate covered the situation with no problem, so I guess I am not sure you will be able to convince them. Good luck regardless! I hate it when people blow themselves up. Someone has to clean up the mess and the guberment starts yapping about taking my vape away. Not good.
You're more than welcome. Here's my attempt at getting a pic of the experiment. Really pitiful, lol.Thanks again fam
Looks good. Pritty much what I was doing aswell. Pritty funny when the juice is cooking your hand like frying bacon hahaYou're more than welcome. Here's my attempt at getting a pic of the experiment. Really pitiful, lol.
View attachment 691499
Hmm personally I don't hafto justify anything to noone or even myself I'm just trying to help others. Checkout our Facebook page and you will see I'm doing my fair share in giving back to our community f. B All CloudedIf you are trying to help people, then it is simple - use 4.2v in your calculations. That way you cannot possibly exceed the calculated amp draw and this should be communicated to those who do not know this.
Again, I see only 1 reason to do what you are doing and that is to try and justify maxing out a cells CDR. You shouldn’t be using builds which get you close to that anyway. Good luck regardless, but I feel you are wasting a lot of time here.