555 Ignition Coil Driver

This ignition coil driver is a HOT one! From my recollection, it delivers a nastier spark than the legendary Ford Model T
ignition coil. The circuit uses an inverted 555 oscillator that is coupled to an ON Semiconductor BU323Z Darlington
transistor (350V, 10A) that drives a conventional inductive discharge ignition coil. In this topology, the inductive
discharge voltage developed across the transformer primary is multiplied by the turns ration (factor of 100) to easily
deliver a 25kV voltage to the spark gap.

Background of the inductive discharge ignition system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delco_ignition_system
Developed by the brilliant automotive engineer Charles Kettering over 100years ago, the inductive discharge
ignition system continues to be the method of choice and is used on most automobile engines today. The past 50
years has brought a number of improvements. 1. In the mid 1960s, the automotive aftermarket industry offered
transistor ignition products that replaced the breaker points with germanium power transistors. 2. Industry wide,
breaker point contacts were eliminated in the mid 1970s when high voltage silicon transistors came of age.
This eliminated the requirement of the capacitor across the primary switch thus increasing the output energy
significantly. 3. In the mid 1980s when microcontrollers came of age, the ability to optimize the dwell (charge)
time substantially improved high speed performance. 4. More recent improvements include multiple inductive
discharge ignition coils (one for each cylinder) thus eliminating the requirement for the distributor and further
improvement of high speed performance.
Inductive discharge vs. capacitor discharge
I have never seen an intelligent discussion of the pros and cons of inductive vs. capacitor discharge techniques.
While some say that capacitor discharge is superior, the issue is actually complex.

The major drawback of early inductive discharge systems was that the inductor charging time was the limiting
factor at high RPMs where the reduced dwell time reduces spark energy. However, there is a little known
advantage to inductive dischargethis is the high rate of change of the discharge current (di/dt) that far exceeds
that of the capacitive discharge system. This occurs because the flux is already present in the magnetic circuit so
all that must occur is that the current be transferred from primary to secondary. This high rate of change of
current causes the leading edge of the ignition pulse to be superior. Also, the inherent simplicity and reliability
of the inductive discharge system is unparalleled. In the muscle car era (1960s & 70s), the capacitor discharge
system brought significant high RPM improvement, but todays advanced inductive discharge systems may
actually be superior.
The circuit
I used a variation of the inverted 555 oscillator to provide proper output signal polarity.
http://www.electroschematics.com/7114/inverted-555-timer-circuit/
While the circuit could have been designed without Q1 using the specified high hFE transistor for Q2
(BU323Z), the transistor I actually had on hand was the low hFE BUW13 that required the additional stage. As
is, the circuit is able to accommodate either device.
How it works
Q2 is normally turned via the base drive flowing through R5 so the coil primary current integrates to maximum.
The 1 series power resistor is required because the coil is rated for 9Vthis reduces the power dissipation
inside the coil resistance. 1mS pulses from the 555 timer repeatedly turn on Q1. Q1 subsequently removes the
base drive to Q2. The 555 operates over the frequency or pulse repetition range of 10 to 200HZ. When Q2 turns
off, the collector voltage spikes to about 250V as the inductor attempts to keep the current flowing. The
secondary voltage is equal to the primary voltage times the turns ratio (100) thus resulting in a secondary
voltage of 25kV.
Differences in the circuit that was actually tested
Q1: 2N4401
Q2: BUW13 (non-darlington power transistor, 15A, 850V)
Clamp diodes: Visible in the photo, but not on the schematic are a pair of 200V silicon transient suppressor
diodes (1.5KE200) in series. These were added to protect the power transistorI did not want any device
failures
R5: 40, 12W
R4: 510, 0.5W
Recommendation for Q2
The On Semiconductor BU323Z high voltage power Darlington transistor is currently available from DigiKey
for $2.78 each. Integrated into the device is a 360V clamp zener device that turns the transistor on in the event
the voltage becomes excessive. Data sheet link: http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/BU323Z-D.PDF
DigiKey offers a number of other suitable devicesyou can do the research on their powerful parameter search
engine.
Other potential devices include the obsolete BUW13 or BUV48 transistors that are available on eBay at a
reasonable priceif used, note the circuit differences in the previous section.
How much voltage can the circuit generate?

That is your problemas the spark gap dimension is increased, the required breakdown voltage also increases.
Eventually, the current will flow in an undesired patharc across the coil HV terminal to the primary
terminalcoil destruction (internal arc)power transistor failure. While the BU323Z boasts internal
protection, make sure you have a spareMurphys Law comes into play especially when there are no spares
Oscillographs

Observations
Per the oscillographs, the VCE actually reaches 400V peakI do not know if the clamp devices absorbed any
current. In my car ignition system, the VCE runs at a more reasonable 250V peak. Also, I was unable to
understand the secondary current waveform so I conveniently omitted itthe data may be bogus. Strange things
can happen when attempting to instrument high power plasma discharge. I also suspect that my coil may be
defective is some waythe output pulse was of negative polarity, indicating that it was not connected internally
as a true autotransformer. However, my experience on this detail is so limited that I do not know what to expect.