Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Thanks NP.  Always a pleasure to read an upbeat post.  I have a problem with the ac supply source.  For reasons which will entirely exahust everyone's patience - the circuit would probably need to carry two loads - negative to one load and positive to another.  I can't see it working through a supply with a rectified current.

But I've undertaken to test this which, hopefully, will not be too far away.  Otherwise, I agree.  With the caveat that the circuit is configured with two entirely separate loads - then indeed - the numbers should stack up.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[cHeeseburger]

I assume your challenge here is open to anyone.  So...please observe the presentation video starting at 8:25 in (very near the end).  The mystery presenter clearly points to the VxV math trace and says clearly that it shows 5 Watts.  So your challenge is rather easy, Rosemary.


Golly.  Humbugger.  If I didn't know better I'd think you were 'spinning'.  Actually, I'd be inclined to think that this was a HUMDINGER of a lie.  I'll post a link to the video in question.  There is NOTHING in that math trace that is referred to as watts.  Unless - that is - that you are concluding that -5VV that Donovan points to - is somehow meant to relate the the measured plus/minus 44 watts dissipated. 

Sorry.  I forgot to add the link to the video.  Here it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyOmoGluMCc

It reminds me of the time when you related that joke to us all where you got clearance from some rather weighty Governmental laboratories - on one of TK's videos.  You pointed out that, notwithstanding evidence to the contrary - they had found a 'hidden' wire that was therefore appropriate to that junction.  Remeber that Cheesie?   For those readers that may be interested here's that link. 

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/01/36-pretender.html

I've said this before.  If I were inclined to suspicions and general paranoia - then I'd be inclined to think that you had some kind of agenda here. 

And - if you need to explain those 'spikes' as coming from the capacitance in the MOSFETs - then you'd need to explain how it is that they generate in excess of 60 amps in both directions through the circuit.  It would take a miracle of some considerable proportions to manage that argument and still sound sane.

Rosemary
EDITED

Anyone can listen, starting at 8:25 in the video.  I quote: "And finally, the most important aspect of it would be the actual instantaneous WATTAGE calculation as can be seen on the LeCroy."  The camera then zooms to the LeCroy and he refers us to the red math trace and the VV number FIVE shown.  How this equates to me being a liar by simply referring to what was said in the video...your video...I cannot fathom.

You seem to be reverting again to name-calling and vicious ad hominem attacks, Rosemary.  You make a big deal over something that you acknowledge was just a joke.

Regarding the 60A spikes coming from the gate capacitance, I have no idea what you are talking about.  There are currents flowing in the gate circuit loop that get into the shunt, positioned as it is.  Some of them (the large spikes) come from energy supplied by the driving pulses that come out of the signal generator. 

Other currents that represent the 1.5MHz oscillations at the gate are also appearing on the shunt.  You reported that these represent about 5W of power.  Neither of these currents are flowing into or out of the battery.  They should not be included in any measurement of battery current.  This can be accomplished by moving the shunt out of the gate/source leg and putting it in the battery leg, as I have shown.

Please stick to the subject and stop the personal flame war, Rosemary.  As you may have noticed, that's what I am doing.  Just the facts and helpful relevant solid technical observations and suggestions regarding accurate measurement methods, no insults and no name-calling.  You will not bait me into a flame war if that's what you are trying to do.   

Bryan

[nul-points]

Thanks NP.  Always a pleasure to read an upbeat post.

I have a problem with the ac supply source.
...
- the circuit would probably need to carry two loads - negative to one load and positive to another
...

upbeat is good! 

there shouldn't be a problem replacing your battery bank - which is currently connected as a unipolar supply, i believe - with a unipolar output power supply** unit fed from the AC supply

one benefit of this scheme is that you can transfer your experiment without needing to change any of the wiring

(** need to use a simpler, non switched-mode type supply, so that your circuit can return energy to the output ballast capacitor - which must be directly across output, with no 'non-return' diodes)

if you mean that you want to use a split-supply (ie., Pos-Gnd-Neg), then that will still work with the Kill-o-Watt type test scheme outlined above - just replace the unipolar supply with a split-supply unit, and connect to your circuit as you wish)

looking forward to hearing about any 'AC supplied' results!

all the best
np


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com

[neptune]

Hi Rosemary .Rearrange your batteries into a U shaped line , so that the input and output terminals are physically close together . Now your scope probes will reach .If you lived closer I would get on my bike and come and help you lift them! .Upbeat as ever , Neptune .

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Rosemary .Rearrange your batteries into a U shaped line , so that the input and output terminals are physically close together . Now your scope probes will reach .If you lived closer I would get on my bike and come and help you lift them! .Upbeat as ever , Neptune .

LOL.  Yet again Neptune.  I clearly have that dysfunctional IQ that Poynty keeps pointing to.  Of course.  But that too will need to wait until tomorrow.  I will, God willing, and assuming that I survive the night - solemnly undertake to show those waveforms directly across the battery. 

Golly.  Clearly in need of more intellect.    

Regards,
Rosemary