New Rosemary Ainslie Demonstration Scheduled for Sunday, 4 August 2013

[poynt99]

TK,

After the demo went offline, I had them do an OC FG measurement with the scope:

The FG was set to -15V and +3V, with a 20% duty cycle. Frequency was 1kHz.

[poynt99]

A brief summary of the final demo today:

Phase 1 Pbat (at board) = -114.8W

Phase 2 (FG) power ~ 0.3W

Phase 3 Pbat (at batteries) ~ +15W

Power dissipated at RL ( ~20ºC rise from old data) ~ 2.5W

[TinselKoala]

TK,

After the demo went offline, I had them do an OC FG measurement with the scope:

The FG was set to -15V and +3V, with a 20% duty cycle. Frequency was 1kHz.

Thank you. You will note that this is the very first time, in all the years, that Ainslie's precise FG opencircuit output voltages have been posted.
Even if they are only precise to the volt. Personally I might have measured them to milliVolt precision and stated them at the beginning ... but then I'm not making OU claims.

Are these the precise values used for the power determinations? What about that last scope shot visible in the Live Demo just before Ainslie pulled the plug.... have you ever seen anything like that in a correctly wired circuit?

Is this supposed to represent the current in the FG's cvr?

[poynt99]

Disregard that last scope shot; After the demo was declared officially over, Donovan was moving scope probes around in some unknown fashion, as they were trying to recreate a condition they had observed prior to the start of the demo.

[TinselKoala]

Disregard that last scope shot; After the demo was declared officially over, Donovan was moving scope probes around in some unknown fashion, as they were trying to recreate a condition they had observed prior to the start of the demo.

OK, fine.

Is it really necessary for me to "poynt" out that, had they actually measured the open circuit FG settings instead of marking them on a bit of tape, they might have had more success in repeating their earlier "measurements"?

Now I've got SWeir's friend Joshs on my case because he thinks I'm not sufficiently grateful, I guess. But if "debunks" have as many holes in them as the "bunk" does in the first place, what good are they?

The protocols were discussed and agreed upon. You got attempted feedback from me, or should have, that the Phase 5 FG settings should have been done asap. Yet the public demo was stopped and cut off before the agreed upon protocol was completed, the FG settings were changed and there is no clear idea of just what the FG settings were that produced the "fail" power measurements.

This may be "sufficient" to show Ainslie wrong, the exact FG settings may be a trivial detail, but to omit them is _not scientific_ or good practice.