Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

I think I see now how GL's mosfet designation is correct. 

In the "oscillation" mode I think he must be applying a NEGATIVE voltage to the Bias input point  marked RED + on his diagram and the corresponding positive polarity to the Bias input point marked - GREEN.

Is that right, GL?

ETA: GL, last night I found your opto-isolated half-bridge circuit that you posted in Ainslie's old thread ... I think I'll build a solid-state Tesla coil using your circuit for the primary driver. It's too bad the PG50 is too slow and resistive for a good HF TC primary driver, but maybe I can get them to work with some pulse-shaping on the output before the primary coil itself.  The TinselKoil uses a full H-bridge of all N-channel mosfets that are driven by "trifilar" or three-winding toroidal gate pulse phase transformers which are in turn driven by a PNP/NPN transistor current amplifier stage just like in your half-bridge, but doubled. The gate pulse phase transformers isolate the switching circuit similarly to the optoisolators in your half-bridge. The whole TinselKoil project actually developed out of an attempt to show Ainslie just what one could in fact do with the "spike" from the collapse of a charged inductor using properly switched mosfets. As I have tried to explain before.... the TinselKoil is actually an "Ainslie" circuit using properly driven mosfets, TRUE resonance and voltage rise through standing wave resonance, to produce what her measurements would no doubt call MASSIVE OU performance. Try reconciling a power curve that shows peaks of 7 AMPS multiplied by 30,000 VOLTS with what the TinselKoil is drawing from the mains supply, using Ainslie math.

Thanks for all the good work you have been doing on this over the years, GL. You have a lot of patience and a good attitude, and I know you are still having fun.

[Groundloop]

I think I see now how GL's mosfet designation is correct. 

In the "oscillation" mode he is applying a NEGATIVE voltage to the Bias input point  marked RED + on his diagram and the corresponding positive polarity to the Bias input point marked - GREEN.

Is that right, GL?

(ETA: GL, last night I found your opto-isolated half-bridge circuit that you posted in Ainslie's old thread ... I think I'll build a solid-state Tesla coil using your circuit for the primary driver. It's too bad the PG50 is too slow and resistive for a good HF TC primary driver, but maybe I can get them to work with some pulse-shaping on the output before the primary coil itself. Thanks for all the good work you have been doing on this over the years... )

TK,

No, I'm using the voltages as shown in my drawing. Negative is green, positive is red. So in my drawing I'm
using negative voltage input on the green pad on the bias input.

I think it will be clearer if I just remove the Q1 and Q2 reference and just say "the mosfet that oscillates" and the "mosfet that is off".
The labeling is not that important. It is how the circuit works as described in the drawing that matter.

What is more important is the fact that not all bias energy is going to RLOAD. Some of the energy goes through
the body diode on "the mosfet that is off".

GL.

[TinselKoala]

TK,

No, I'm using the voltages as shown in my drawing. Negative is green, positive is red. So in my drawing I'm
using negative voltage input on the green pad on the bias input.

I think it will be clearer if I just remove the Q1 and Q2 reference and just say "the mosfet that oscillates" and the "mosfet that is off".
The labeling is not that important. It is how the circuit works as described in the drawing that matter.

What is more important is the fact that not all bias energy is going to RLOAD. Some of the energy goes through
the body diode on "the mosfet that is off".

GL.

OK, with the polarities you have shown, your remaining full mosfet must be the Q2 mosfet and the lone Zener is in the Q1 mosfet.  PLEASE PLEASE let us stick to the mosfet names that are used in the AINSLIE approved diagram. And also please PLEASE let us use the simple colors RED and BLACK to indicate the bias inputs to the board, which correspond to the simple FG alligator cliplead colors and positions shown in the Ainslie board photograph. Then when one puts a negative voltage to the RED input perhaps nobody will be confused.

IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

In the High Heat mode that uses NO OSCILLATIONS,  it makes a HUGE difference whether a single mosfet is turned on or a stack of 4 is turned on. 5 or six amps will go through a stack of 4 in parallel without difficulty. 5 or 6 amps through the single Q1 during the high-heat mode is not so easy.
SO EVEN THOUGH  the Q1-Q2 designation might not be important during the oscillation mode, the designation DOES make a difference during the other high heat positive bias mode.

And here is a good time to point out: THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE AT ALL that shows high heat WITH OSCILLATIONS ONLY. All of the Ainslie data showing high heat in the load has used a bipolar pulse with substantial current evident during the NON OSCILLATION mode: high current flowing through the single Q1, NOT the gang of 4 Q2s, if the schematic in use was the one which Ainslie has repeatedly affirmed is correct.

So Please, GL, use the Q1-Q2 naming convention that Ainslie and .99 and MH and I have been using.

[poynt99]

TK,

GL's diagram is essentially the same as mine (attached). He is still calling Q1 "Q2" and vice versa according to Rosemary's First paper diagram though. I've not shown Q1's diode because it has no effect to the measurements in my simulation.

The conclusion from GL's test is this (GL, check your Main Input power calc. it has a typo):

The FG contributes power to the circuit (with or without the other MOSFET installed), which is half as much power as the battery supply (in this case), while the circuit is in the "negative bias" oscillation mode of operation.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Dear Stefan,
Frankly I also dislike censorship.  And there is no way that this can be applied without insulting the intelligence of the readers of this thread.  Here's what I propose as a solution.

No member may accuse another member of
.  fraudulent misrepresentation
.  mendacity
.  lunacy
.  ignorance
.  stupidity
.  senility
or any other malicious insult, unless that member makes a full disclosure of his name and address that the issue can be resolved in a Court of Law as required by either member.

No member may discredit another member's work variously based on
.  a 'failed' replication of the experiments under discussion
.  a departure from standard measurement protocols
.  disgusting and disrespectful inferences
.  disgusting and disrespectful utterances
.  disgusting and disrespectful addresses
or any other malicious insult, unless that member makes a full disclosure of his name and address that the issue can be resolved in a Court of Law as required by either member.

No member is entitled to
.  allege
.  infer
.  imply
anything at all against another member unless it is satirical or unless that member makes a full disclosure of his name and address that the issue can be resolved in a Court of Laws as required by either member.

Now.  In terms of this thread, there have been multiple breaches - specifically by those such as picowatt - MileHigh - TK - FTC - The Boss - Mrsean - PhiChaser.  And therefore - in fairness - they must come forward with a full and public disclosure of their actual identities or you must disclose this information to me on their behalf - that I may then exercise my options in terms of acknowledged legal recourse to redress this.  Failing which, if this slander and traducement is only enabled by their ability to hide their identities and thereby escape reasonable accountability - then I would strongly propose that you lock this thread that you can then bring these legal transgressions to a close.  And if you want examples of these multiple breaches of your forum guidelines, then I must impose on you to read through this thread - in its entirety.  Then.  Thereafter, IF and as required - these members wish to discuss the science related to this claim with a renewed sense of decorum and decency, gravitas and sincerity - then they can start another thread that deals appropriately with this subject with the required respect shown to ALL participating members.

Regards,
Rosemary