Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Limitation resistance on IN-4

2023-06-27 Thread Michail Wilson
Welcome. :) Sent from Space On Jun 27, 2023, at 5:06 AM, Benoit Tourret wrote: Hello Michail, I tested 4, 7 and 13 connected together as anode, it works fine. I don't need to rise the voltage, 180V is just perfect. I'll see in a couple of days if the 3k resistors are OK or if I must ajust

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Limitation resistance on IN-4

2023-06-26 Thread Michail Wilson
Just tie the anodes together Sent from Space On Jun 26, 2023, at 2:22 PM, Benoit Tourret wrote:  755 / 5 000 Résultats de traduction Résultat de traduction star_border I made some new tests. I mounted 6 IN-12 tubes on the clock board. I noticed that there were 3K resistors on board. So I

[neonixie-l] Re: Limitation resistance on IN-4

2023-06-26 Thread Benoit Tourret
755 / 5 000 Résultats de traduction Résultat de traduction star_border I made some new tests. I mounted 6 IN-12 tubes on the clock board. I noticed that there were 3K resistors on board. So I plugged my tubes directly into the board without adding any resistance. It worked directly at 170V.

[neonixie-l] Re: Limitation resistance on IN-4

2023-06-22 Thread Benoit Tourret
I am at the maximum allowed by the software: 200V I can mesure between 195 and 198V. At the max brightness, I am less bright than another IV-4 clock I have. (Sputnik clock, 1 x 4 Mutiplexed + 1 OG-4) If I enable the LDR, under 250 some digits doesn't light, (usually the 0 witch is more

[neonixie-l] Re: Limitation resistance on IN-4

2023-06-22 Thread Blitzen
What is your voltage set at? 6.8K would be an appropriate resistance for these tubes at 180vdc in direct-drive mode, which that clock kit is not; it's a 1x6 multiplex. Multiplexing usually yields a less-bright display. There is some debate as to whether or not you should use lower resistance