Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

Rosemary,

You are correct, but TK is correct also. The problem is that you are both talking about slightly different power measurements.

Clearly Rosemary, you are referring to AVERAGE POWER. Clearly, TK is referring to INSTANTANEOUS POWER.

Let's look at two scenarios:

1) 20W for 1 second out of 6, then 0W for 5 seconds out of this 6.

2) 3.33W for 6 seconds out of 6.

The AVERAGE POWER over the same 6 second period in both scenarios is 3.33W.

However, in scenario 1), the INSTANTANEOUS POWER at any time within the first second is 20W, while the INSTANTANEOUS POWER at any time within the first second in scenario 2) is 3.33W.

She's not correct. Look at the duty cycle, which she NOW acknowledges is more like 1/8, giving an average power of about 2.5 Watts.

All this is just to distract from the fact that she made a claim, another one, that is unsupported by her own data: the claim that no or tiny current flowed during the ON portion of the cycle. In what part of the world is 320 mA considered TINY or negligible, when examining a claim of overunity performance?

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I NEVER MADE THAT ARGUMENT, AINSLIE, you once again are responding to your delusions rather than to what I said. Who ever said that there was? Not me, not PW, nobody. The 20 Watts is dissipated IN THE CIRCUIT ELEMENTS, mostly the mosfet, WHENEVER AND FOR HOWEVER LONG the mosfet Q1 is receiving the +5 volt gate signal.
You are arguing with your own hallucinations again, and you aren't making sense. Your temperature measurements are a completely different issue and contain their OWN set of errors.


But I am glad you acknowledge your stupid "3.33" and "1/6" duty cycle error. It's hard to wriggle out of your mistakes when your nose is rubbed into it in public, isn't it. Well, there's a lot more of that coming.

So... we have the concession from AINSLIE that there IS IN FACT 320 mA flowing during the ON phase on that shot, a not insignificant amount at 62 volts potential, contradicting the claim in the blog post and invalidating the conclusion based on it.

AND we have the admission that she calculated the duty cycle incorrectly and used that incorrect figure to come up with the earlier "3.33" Watts average during her mendacious criticism of my CORRECT, entirely correct, power calculations as presented.

Keep it up, Ainslie, you are doing fine.

My dear Leon.  I will keep it up.  I know I'm doing just 'fine'.  You've made a GLARING ERROR in power analysis and then you've rather absurdly persisted in claiming that it's correct.  You are UTTERLY WRONG.  Couldn't be more so.  As I said - CATASTROPHICALLY so.  You've shown a complete inability to understand the concept of wattage which you're trying to promote can be equated any single sample of instantaneous wattage.  Wattage is ALWAYS related to POWER and POWER always factors in time.  Here's that equation again.

Rosie Pose

[TinselKoala]

And the only person who has revealed incompetence and ignorance is YOURSELF. 
And this little exercise in power analysis that you've persisted in - has certainly enabled that revelation.  And that difference between 1/8 and 1/6th - yes - that was my oversight.  I was out by a small fraction.  You're out by a HUGE FACTOR.  In fact you're out by a factor of a little over 12.  I'd say that's CATASTROPHIC.

Rosie Pose

Where is this factor of 12 you are talking about? Huh?

Show me where I ever said that the LOAD was dissipating 20 Watts.  Look back in the thread Ainslie, you will find that I calculated the load's dissipation using I^2R as a little over 1 Watt during the ON time, way back at the beginning of your hallucinatory rant.

Again, you lie and misrepresent. Where is the factor of 12?

[poynt99]

She's not correct. Look at the duty cycle, which she NOW acknowledges is more like 1/8, giving an average power of about 2.5 Watts.

All this is just to distract from the fact that she made a claim, another one, that is unsupported by her own data: the claim that no or tiny current flowed during the ON portion of the cycle. In what part of the world is 320 mA considered TINY or negligible, when examining a claim of overunity performance?

I was referring more to her conceptual understanding of the computation of average power in general using the duty cycle percentages. If the duty cycle estimation was off, then it can (and apparently has been) corrected.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

and Guys this argument is no longer even dealing with science.

She's not correct. Look at the duty cycle, which she NOW acknowledges is more like 1/8, giving an average power of about 2.5 Watts.

All this is just to distract from the fact that she made a claim, another one, that is unsupported by her own data: the claim that no or tiny current flowed during the ON portion of the cycle. In what part of the world is 320 mA considered TINY or negligible, when examining a claim of overunity performance?

The duty cycle is most assuredly 12.5% ON - 87.5% OFF.  I am NOT claiming that that 320 mA is TINY or negligible.  I'm claiming that it is a rate of current flow applicable to 12.5% of each duty cycle.  Which means that the 20 watts that TK measured is NOT correct.  it is 20 watts x 12.5% which is 2.5 watts.  DO THE MATH... LEON

Regards,
Rosemary