it is coming off the fire switch. it could be touching the screen or top plate at different moments. i would have no idea
Vapor Flask V3 DNA40 Clone thread
- Thread starter Croak
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
This is how I confirmed how Nickel Purity operated:
Fire a coil at a given starting resistance. Monitor the screen, matching the live resistance display against the live temperature display. Find the point where these settle down, ie it's hovering around the same resistance and the same temperature. Check this on a TCR calculator, putting in the starting resistance, starting temperature, ending resistance (as shown on screen), ending temperature (as shown on screen) and the calc will tell you the coefficient used for that value.
Repeat tests at a range of NPs to be sure.
Within about 10 minutes of such tests it became apparent that the NP value was simply the coefficient - when NP was 60 the coefficient used was 0.006.
I would have declared it as that with full confidence immediately, had I not been at the time confused as to why the default was then NP70 and Titanium was better at NP42 not 35. But since it's become apparent that these are necessary adjustments counteracting the chronic low resistance reads of the chip.
Fire a coil at a given starting resistance. Monitor the screen, matching the live resistance display against the live temperature display. Find the point where these settle down, ie it's hovering around the same resistance and the same temperature. Check this on a TCR calculator, putting in the starting resistance, starting temperature, ending resistance (as shown on screen), ending temperature (as shown on screen) and the calc will tell you the coefficient used for that value.
Repeat tests at a range of NPs to be sure.
Within about 10 minutes of such tests it became apparent that the NP value was simply the coefficient - when NP was 60 the coefficient used was 0.006.
I would have declared it as that with full confidence immediately, had I not been at the time confused as to why the default was then NP70 and Titanium was better at NP42 not 35. But since it's become apparent that these are necessary adjustments counteracting the chronic low resistance reads of the chip.
But we're (I'm) talking wattage, it's vape just the same as the rest of my TP mods, even TP seems about the same.
If you think about how a mechanical would vapes with a .7Ω coil vs a 1.2Ω coil it would be a difference like night and day.
The board would supply the coil with way lower voltage if it figured it for 0.07Ω
If you recall a couple of days ago I probed the posts of a dripper on both SXK and evolv powered mods and got very similar voltages, this was before they hit TP
Oh, that was 2.02 volts with a .1Ω @ 28 watts at about 2 seconds @ 450 F (no air)
If you think about how a mechanical would vapes with a .7Ω coil vs a 1.2Ω coil it would be a difference like night and day.
The board would supply the coil with way lower voltage if it figured it for 0.07Ω
If you recall a couple of days ago I probed the posts of a dripper on both SXK and evolv powered mods and got very similar voltages, this was before they hit TP
Oh, that was 2.02 volts with a .1Ω @ 28 watts at about 2 seconds @ 450 F (no air)
Last edited:
Well if you're referring to NP95 you're talking TC - or at least, NP has no effect whatsoever outside TC mode. NP is used to modify the temperature calculations - it tells the chip what temperature to calculate from a given resistance rise. It does nothing when TC is off and/or if you're vaping Kanthal in Wattage mode.
But yeah I don't know about you findings that a 0.12Ω coil reading as 0.07Ω still vapes like a 0.12Ω in terms of the voltage sent. I haven't used the mod once in power mode thus far, and I have done almost no Ni200 testing. I've been using Stainless Steel, Resistherm and Titanium coils, in the resistance range 0.30Ω - 0.60Ω.
I don't know if I'd notice the difference in voltage between, say, 0.30Ω and 0.35Ω, especially as I've never used those wires before the last few days.
I can say with some certainty that the low reading of 0.07Ω (versus real of 0.12Ω) is used for TC calculations.
I cannot say whether it is used for the voltage calculations - but you are suggesting it is not.
So maybe the low resistance reading (0.07) is shown on the screen, and used for the TC calcs (hence high NP), but is not used to decide how much votlage to send for a given configured wattage. That would match both my findings and yours.
I don't know yet. I'll do testing of my own later, on wattage mode/sent volts.
Ok I'm on to something, hold on
So I turned TP off and since it give real time readings I used them.
They seem not to consistent so I had to fire quite a few times.
@.21 volts, .17Ω = 28.73 watts. my setting is 30 watts
So I turned TP off and since it give real time readings I used them.
They seem not to consistent so I had to fire quite a few times.
@.21 volts, .17Ω = 28.73 watts. my setting is 30 watts
Last edited:
Brain fart here, guys... With the apparently solid 510 ground, why would the top plate even be part of the circuit?
It shares the ground with the 510
On the Evolv DNA 40 boards the batt minus and 510 ground are connected internally on the board, these appear to be the same.
Here's part of the problem perhaps getting a ground with the screws. Their pretty short and the holes that they go into on the box are beveled so no much threads biting.
They can be 10 mm long, I measured through the plate to thebottom of the holes and it's 12 mm.
In the first picture I have a screw in the plate to show just how deep they go, bevel is at least 1 mm so not much thread contact
Why would they complete the board circuit by grounding through the body and topcap to the 510 ground? That seems silly...
I was expecting separate dedicated battery sleds with live and earth coming from them like the SX Mini
From the pics above I now see its a tray/cradle holding batteries and board
Because the 510 socket is mounted on it. It provides the negative from the batteries to the board.
That all looks good to me, better than I was expecting
The insulation split on the earth should not be an issue unless it can touch a circuit on the board when in place
Would just wrap some electrical tape round that to be sure
Looking at all the pics, the weak points are going to be the battery caps
The threads in the casing for the caps if they are not clean
And as @dwcraig1 found plus rectified the top plate to casing mating surfaces
with all these being good/cleaned up, chaffed earth wire insulated any further faults must be board related
the red arrow shows where the 510 ground wire is soldered to the board, the board is using it also for the board's battery ground (which is chassis ground)
The green arrow shows the unused pad, internally they are the same
That's just silly...
it will be switching earth [ I think] to close a circuit on the board and fire
Just a thought... How does grounding through the battery ground on the board, rather than the 510 ground, effect the chipsets ability to measure resistance?
Last edited:
I don't think it will effect resistance reading as the live is fired through the board
Think its just done that way so the board knows there is a good earth to the 510
But they forgot about the mating surfaces
Piggy backing off the 510 earth wire to the battery would be the way forward I think
Last edited:
I'm no PCB designer, but it seems to me, with all of the battery and resistance issues being reported, the first thing I would try is wiring the board the way it was intended to be wired.
Yeah me neither but I think we both have enough grasp to see that looks the better way
Maybe an electronics engineer will pop their head in see something we don't
Looking at the pictures again there is no way of getting negative power direct from the battery as the sled does not have a negative post to tack onto
Cleaning up the underside of the top plate & mating surface of the case as dwcraig1 did is the only option
Or soldering a link wire between the top plate/510 & the casing
What a ball ache
Cleaning up the underside of the top plate & mating surface of the case as dwcraig1 did is the only option
Or soldering a link wire between the top plate/510 & the casing
What a ball ache
Ok so I cleaned out the battery cap area pretty well. But how clean do they need to be. I would say it is much more metal than anodizing/powdercoating. What of it is too loos in the battery cap. Is there something I could rap the battery cap in to make sure it is making a good connection? Just a though I am no at the mod and have not fixed the insulation issue. But once I do and put it back together, if it is still giving me issues. Is there something I could puns on the battery cap to make sure it is making a good connection. It is working with my applying a good amount of pressure to the battery cap
- Status
Similar threads
