another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[picowatt]

MH,

I have always considered that if the FG signal common was connected to Bat- instead of to the CSR, that only the DC bias when Q2 is biased on would be unaccounted for by the CSR readings.  In hindsight, one must also add an AC path whose reactance is equal to the FG test lead capacitance as well as the FG out to FG chassis capacitance (which I would suspect would be much lower than the test lead capacitance).

Although this FG/FG lead capacitance AC path would still be less robust than the path provided by the MOSFET's Ciss reactance, the AC and DC current bypassing the CSR does begin to add significant errors.

PW

[poynt99]

Hi .99

I use to use that but if some one opening the PDF only has "Adobe" for file reading like most users ..... it won't open the file up and you get a error message, like I just got.

So everyone would have to have "PDF creator" .... whom Adobe hates.

Best,
Fuzzy

Glen,

I am using Adobe Reader 8 and it opens just fine. Otherwise I would have noticed that.

[MileHigh]

PW:

I agree that some extra AC will go through the FG path too.  The bottom line is that either you look at the true battery current or you don't.  The operating assumption is that Rosemary didn't have the slightest clue that during the testing at the university that this could have been happening.  When she is presented with a new concept that she perceives will possibly detract from her claim she will resist it vociferously.  It has taken a few months for her to even concede that current could be passing through the function generator and bypassing the current sensing resistor.  Even now she is uncomfortable with the idea and she is still outright rejecting the annotated schematic diagram that I have posted a few times.

Just to speculate on the goings on at the university lab in South Africa, I have to surmise that there were some half-hearted participants that assisted her.  So I doubt that anybody from the university that was truly competent in electronics was deeply involved in her project.  They would have spotted the problems right away and when they saw the "secret hidden" true schematic they would have told her that the MOSFETs were wired in a nonsensical way.  In the same way, sometimes Rosie trumpets her first allegedly "COP 17" circuit as being "endorsed" by real-world engineers from major industrial companies including ABB.  My interpretation of that is that an engineer from ABB passed by one day and took a cursory look at her circuit and nodded and smiled and shook her hand.  Rosie is spinning that as an "official endorsement."  Again, I am just speculating.

TK:

I watched your clip.  Just one correction about what transpired in the clip.  When you do the full positive offset of the waveform you say "all of the MOSFETs are on now."  What really transpired is that only one (?) MOSFET was on, not all, but the low and the high components of the offset waveform were both high enough in potential such that the single MOSFET stayed on all the time.  I don't think you were making an outright mistake, it's more associated with how people can be prone to making mistakes when they are recording themselves and trying to rattle off a bunch of technical details at the same time.  It's not easy to make a clip.

I have felt the same phenomenon myself many times.  It's kind of a "walk, film, and chew gum at the same time" thang....

MileHigh

[picowatt]

And do it all in the wee hours no less....

[poynt99]

Stefan's forum is corrupting the uploaded files, that's why my pdf won't open. 

And that's most likely why your image won't upload either MH.