Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

OK... back to business.

Clearly for any testing to continue we've got to get some baseline ideas down pat.

First: the circuit. I'm using "revision C" which is posted above somewhere, but I still have to power the 555 with a separate power source, and I see that SH would like to see it powered by the same batteries as the main circuit. So would I.  Any ideas as to how to implement this, with minimum component count and circuit modification to the main circuit?

Second: the load. I have a water heater element, 1500 W, and also the stack of ceramic tube, wirewound resistors. Both loads have a resistance of 10.3-10.4 Ohms and inductance of around 75 microHenry. Yet they behave a bit differently in the circuit. I prefer the ceramic wirewounds, because immersion in oil makes sense to me for rough calorimetry. I can't get the entire water heater element covered in oil and insulated. But if "naked" load is required ala NERDs, then I would use the water heater element, I guess. Any thoughts on this matter?

Third... batteries and voltages. I now have six matched batteries, 12 V nominal, 5 A-H. .99 and RA seem to have agreed that 36 volts was good enough for testing to show her effect. I have found that it gets hard to get oscillations at or below 30 Volts, and going up to 48 makes it a lot easier. 36 is fine though if that's agreed to as being suitable for proof-testing. BUT..... there has never been an explanation forthcoming from the NERDs as to why one battery was removed, leaving 48 volts, in the second part of the demo. I think it is because that part used the positive pulse mode, which would have turned on the Q1 mosfet hard, and allowed current to flow that was near the transistor's absolute maximum rating.... and that transistor was not properly heat-sunk. At 72 or 60 volts... Pop goes the mosfet. So they had to reduce the voltage for that test... and probably don't even understand why.... .or perhaps someone DID understand why... but it wasn't likely RA.
So I think the issue of the 48 volts is an important technical question.... how many volts should I use then, 72, 60, 48, 36.... or ?

And fourth... I am really trying to understand this "phase" thing. As far as I can tell Tar Baby is creating the same phase relationships between the various signals as NERD is making. Yet someone's panties are all in a bunch over this phase thing. Can someone please explain to me, in words I might understand, just what her issue is and what the flak she is talking about? I surely would like my batteries to keep their charge, and if phase is the key, let's unlock that door.

And fifth... Do I want my batteries to "recharge" or just not to discharge? I'm not sure I see the difference, even in light of Rosemary's zipon conjectures. If the batteries need to be there at all, then something is probably flowing out of them at some time, and so must be replenished if it is not to diminish. Unless even the supply of zipons is unlimited of course. Well, if the COP is (blank) INFINITY, I guess the zipon supply must be unlimited. So ok.... then....... maybe they left the zipons out of my batteries at the factory. Stranger things have happened, I understand.

[TinselKoala]

@Magluvin.... yes, ironically, my circuit has a problem, and I'm starting to be afraid it IS impossible to solve.

You see.... no matter what I do, if my load is heating.... my batteries discharge.

[Magluvin]

Personally, I've never heard the term used as a derogatory or any other kind of name for African-Americans, or even black people. 

Really? But your reference to wiki is where it is found. Must be careful with that wiki.

I dont see any relation to the circuit by your sticky tar description.

Mags

[TinselKoala]

Now, as I see it there is a strong claim and a weaker one. The strong claim is COP  INFINITY, batteries never discharge while running the circuit and the heat output is for free, served up by the superluminal zipons. (How she knows that it isn't Glomlets from the underwhere that are doing it, I'll never know, because nobody has ruled out Glomlets, as far as I can tell.)
And the weaker claim is some degree of efficiency in load heating greater than that expected from application of straight DC.

The Dim Bulb test is a rough-and-ready, go-nogo test of the Strong Claim. Three out of five, winner takes all, loser.... gets to keep the white pegboard and clipleads.

But the Weak Claim will require some crude calorimetry, at least. (At least.... if you don't believe in Clarke-Hess, the demon god of power measuring, it will.) So... I can do that. By heating up the container of oil and letting it cool, I can quantify the heat-leak rate of the insulated container, since I know that the specific heat of mineral oil is 1.67 Joules/degree/gram,and that there are 250 mL of oil in there,  and a Watt is a Joule per second, so if I heat the oil to 100 degrees and let it cool back to ambient at 20 degrees, and this takes an hour exactly, or 3600 seconds.... that would be 80 degrees x 250 mL oil x 0.83 gm/mL x 1.67 Joules/degree/gm = 28000 Joules, and per 3600 seconds... or 28000 J/3600 s = about 8 Watts average dissipation over the hour of cooling. So.... then I can use that figure in conjunction with a heat _rise_ caused by the Tar Baby and also a DC control.
First, I can use the CH2330 to measure the input power to the circuit, and see how hot the load heats per unit time. Then I can use a regulated DC power supply to give the load the same average power, but DC, and without the intervening circuit's dissipative elements. Comparing the two graphs generated from the time-temperature data will likely produce a set of curves like these that I got the last time I did this same sort of thing, a couple of years ago. This will tell me the "efficiency" of the device as a heater. And knowing the container's loss rate and the other parameters, I should actually be able to get close to the total energies involved as well.

--- This is old data from RA's COP>17 claim, shown as representing the type of data that a time temp curve will  yield. ----

[TinselKoala]

Really? But your reference to wiki is where it is found. Must be careful with that wiki.

I dont see any relation to the circuit by your sticky tar description.

Mags

Would you feel better if I called it the "DERN STAR" anti-replication device? Are you due to return from Bizarro Universe any time soon?

The name "Tar Baby" doesn't describe my circuit, it only _relates_ to it. And your phase is all ugly, you really should wear more makeup.