mirror of
https://github.com/openglow-org/forgefirm.git
synced 2026-09-27 08:41:13 -07:00
A longer minimum pulse is worse: the gap is what decides striking
min_ticks 6 broke 5 percent striking - seven current segments where 3 gave eight, on a 36.5 s fire window against 41.4 s for eight rungs. Below the minimum the model emits min ticks every min/on periods, so the interval between pulses is min_ticks x tick / density and the base period cancels, which is also why periods 10, 20 and 40 gave identical results earlier. At 5 percent that is 2.26 ms at min 3, which struck, against 4.51 ms at 6, which did not: doubling the minimum doubles the gap as well as the pulse, and the discharge is re-struck each pulse. min 3 sits at the factory's own operating point - its 6.5 percent engrave jobs place 100 us pulses 1.54 ms apart against 1.64 ms for min 3 at that density - and 6 is outside anything the factory does. The bench is back at 3. Measured band for this tube: strikes from ~5 percent density, marks from ~10 percent at F300. That closes the pulse-structure route to a usable 1 percent, since the interval grows as 1/density and 1 percent implies an 11 ms gap. The low end is a scaling problem, and $35 is the control.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -724,6 +724,19 @@ not a release.
|
|||||||
corner instead of the ~7.7× it would rise with no compensation. On the UI
|
corner instead of the ~7.7× it would rise with no compensation. On the UI
|
||||||
scale, PP 1→100 is linear in density (~0.006 per unit, intercept ~0.189) and
|
scale, PP 1→100 is linear in density (~0.006 per unit, intercept ~0.189) and
|
||||||
Full Power sits off that line, where PP ~134 would land.
|
Full Power sits off that line, where PP ~134 would land.
|
||||||
|
- **Density dose limits** (measured on five ladders, `dladder`): under the
|
||||||
|
FIRE-density model the interval between pulses at a level below the
|
||||||
|
minimum is `min_ticks x tick / density` - **the base period cancels**,
|
||||||
|
which is why periods 10, 20 and 40 gave identical results. The tube
|
||||||
|
**strikes down to ~5 % density at a 2.26 ms interval** (`min_ticks` 3,
|
||||||
|
106 us pulses) and **fails to strike at 4.51 ms** (`min_ticks` 6, 213 us):
|
||||||
|
lengthening the pulse at fixed density lengthens the gap in proportion,
|
||||||
|
and the gap is what kills re-striking. It **marks from ~10 %** at F300 on
|
||||||
|
scrap. `min_ticks` 3 is essentially the factory's own structure - its
|
||||||
|
6.5 % engrave jobs put 100 us pulses 1.54 ms apart, against 1.64 ms for
|
||||||
|
`min_ticks` 3 at that density - and 6 is outside anything the factory
|
||||||
|
does. Below ~5 % no pulse shape reaches the tube: the interval grows as
|
||||||
|
1/density, so 1 % implies an 11 ms gap, five times what already failed.
|
||||||
- **Cooling operating point**: 40 % heater duty, 50 s window, flow-rise
|
- **Cooling operating point**: 40 % heater duty, 50 s window, flow-rise
|
||||||
threshold 14.4 °C, re-checks every 150 s. Below ~40 % duty the stagnant loop
|
threshold 14.4 °C, re-checks every 150 s. Below ~40 % duty the stagnant loop
|
||||||
sheds the heater's output by convection well enough to mimic flow (at 30 %,
|
sheds the heater's output by convection well enough to mimic flow (at 30 %,
|
||||||
@@ -1113,6 +1126,13 @@ Open items only. Anything closed is in `CAMPAIGN-LOG.md`.
|
|||||||
With a minimum in place the low end is decoupled from the base period,
|
With a minimum in place the low end is decoupled from the base period,
|
||||||
so the period is free to be chosen on other grounds. It stays at 20.
|
so the period is free to be chosen on other grounds. It stays at 20.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**The low end is a scaling problem, not a modulation one.** The band
|
||||||
|
this tube gives is ~5 % density to strike and ~10 % to mark (facts
|
||||||
|
bank); below that the pulse interval outruns the discharge whatever the
|
||||||
|
pulse shape. So a commanded 1 % can only be made useful by mapping it
|
||||||
|
onto that band, which is what the factory does and what `$35` is under
|
||||||
|
this model.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Owed: the user-facing scale. The factory maps its whole 1-100 power
|
Owed: the user-facing scale. The factory maps its whole 1-100 power
|
||||||
scale onto density 18.9-79.5 % (fit from the three captures; Full Power
|
scale onto density 18.9-79.5 % (fit from the three captures; Full Power
|
||||||
is off that line at ~99.7 %), so its "1 %" is the bottom of the band
|
is off that line at ~99.7 %), so its "1 %" is the bottom of the band
|
||||||
|
|||||||
+33
-9
@@ -2981,15 +2981,39 @@ against the result rather than for it — this ladder started at MPos 0,0 after
|
|||||||
the controller restart, so it may be on different material than the stacked
|
the controller restart, so it may be on different material than the stacked
|
||||||
Y=0/24/48/72 runs.
|
Y=0/24/48/72 runs.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Owed next: whether a longer minimum reaches further down (`min_ticks = 6`,
|
### The sixth ladder: a longer minimum is worse, and why
|
||||||
213 µs, is set on the bench for the next ladder), and then the user-facing
|
|
||||||
scale. Under this model `$35` and `$36` are a density floor and ceiling, so
|
`min_ticks = 6` (213 µs), same ladder otherwise. **It broke 5 % striking** —
|
||||||
mapping S onto the usable band is a settings choice rather than new code, but
|
seven current segments again, boundaries at 14.5, ~19.85, 25.2, 30.4, 35.9
|
||||||
the floor's value wants a finer ladder than the 10 %→20 % step. The trick has
|
and 41.1 s, segments 4.4–4.9 s with none double-length, fire spanning
|
||||||
a ceiling of its own: a longer minimum at fixed dose means longer gaps, and
|
9.5 → 46.0 s = 36.5 s against 41.4 s for eight rungs, and the flat saturated
|
||||||
once gap × feed approaches the beam spot a line dots. At 5 mm/s a 4.5 ms gap
|
tail anchoring rung 8. Seven rungs marked, matching.
|
||||||
is 22 µm against a ~200 µm spot; at 2000 mm/min it is 150 µm, where dotting
|
|
||||||
would start to show.
|
The arithmetic explains it. Below the minimum the model emits `min` ticks
|
||||||
|
every `min/on` periods, so the interval between pulse starts is
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
interval = min_ticks × tick / density
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
and **the base period cancels** — which retroactively explains why periods
|
||||||
|
10, 20 and 40 gave identical results in the first three ladders. At 5 %
|
||||||
|
density that is 2.26 ms at `min_ticks` 3, which struck, against 4.51 ms at 6,
|
||||||
|
which did not. Doubling the minimum doubles the gap as well as the pulse, and
|
||||||
|
the gap is what decides: the discharge is re-struck each pulse and past
|
||||||
|
roughly 2–4 ms it has decayed too far to catch.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
That also puts `min_ticks` 3 at the factory's own operating point — its 6.5 %
|
||||||
|
engrave jobs place 100 µs pulses 1.54 ms apart, against 1.64 ms for
|
||||||
|
`min_ticks` 3 at that density — and puts 6 outside anything the factory does,
|
||||||
|
in the direction that fails. The bench is back at 3.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Measured band for this tube: strikes from ~5 %, marks from ~10 % at F300.**
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Which closes the pulse-structure route to a usable 1 %. The interval grows as
|
||||||
|
1/density, so 1 % implies an 11 ms gap, five times what already failed —
|
||||||
|
no pulse shape reaches down there. The low end is a scaling problem: map the
|
||||||
|
user's 1–100 onto the band that works, via `$35` as the density floor, which
|
||||||
|
is what the factory does and why its cut scale starts at 18.9 % while its
|
||||||
|
engraves reach 6.5 %. Both sit inside the band measured here independently.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Superseded status notes
|
## Superseded status notes
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user