Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

I get it.  The real reason I want to see your program results is to gauge the expected classically predicted shortfall in efficiencies.  It's a gauge.  How about doing the published?  I gather that the inductance isn't easily replicated - but maybe a way around this?

EDIT Sorry.  By published - I mean Quantum publication.

It's easy enough to do the Quantum article circuit, provided you don't mean the published 555 circuit as well? That one won't achieve the desired 3.7% duty cycle Gate drive, so I have been using a pulse generator set accordingly in the simulations. The Quantum article does not have the flyback diode, just to be clear.

I'll see about posting some similar scope shots as I made for the exaggerated 864uH simulation, i.e. go back to the published 8.64uH setting.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Many many thanks Poynt.  Much obliged.

[MileHigh]

Rosemary:

I saw the fist clip a few days ago.  Very nice breadboard work, it looks like a futuristic miniature city - like Kandor.  He seems to have constructed a nice looking device that delivers the goods - high voltage high frequency AC.  Beyond that I don't recall him making any special claims.  The last two clips were eye candy for Tesla nerds.

So the pop quiz question is what's special about the tips of the wires?

Glen:

In your waveforms you can see the 555 is oscillating at about 500 KHz, and every fifth cycle the 555 croaks as part of its fibrillation.  I have to assume your timing components are not set for 500 KHz indicating that something not right is going on, but in the context of this circuit that is considered right.

For fun, you might want to just make a nice robust good old astable multivibrator circut running at 500 KHz and hook that to the MOSFET to see if you get essentially the same shunt resistor waveform at the main load resistor, minus the croaking that you see for every fifth cycle.  If you try this of course get rid of the trimpot that connects to the 555's supply pin (shudder).

As far as the shunt resistor waveform goes, let's just ignore the ringing spikes for a second.  You can see that when the MOSFET switches on you can see the beginning on an exponentially rising current waveform where the scope voltage rises to about 10 millivolts, which translates into about 40 milliamps of load current.  You know the maximum load current is about one amp, so you never even come close to charging the inductive part of the load resistor with real energy.  In fact, you only store about (0.04 x 0.04 X 100) = 0.16% of the maximum storeable "kick back" energy before the MOSFET switches off again.

This is an example of the very high excitation frequency on the MOSFET gate input preventing any real current from flowing through the coil-resistor, the inductive component is preventing that from happening.  The current flow is being "choked" by the high switching frequency in combination with the inductance.

As far as the 0.02 volt increase on the battery goes look at it like this:  If the battery stores 500 kilojoules of energy and the circuit is dissipating 1 Watt of power (for example), then the very simplified run time calculation is 500 thousand seconds, or 139 hours.  Therefore it is reasonable to assume that your battery will not decrease in voltage after 7 1/2 hours.  Also, like I mentioned before, observing a 0.02 volt increase or decrease on your battery voltage after 10 hours of usage means nothing and the wisest course of action would be to treat that data like background noise.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

.99:

I looked at your PSpice plots in #2547.  I think that you hit the nail on the head when you say at these high frequencies, about 190 KHz, that the coil-resistor + MOSFET capacitance become a series RLC resonant tank circuit that is made to oscillate at the pulse excitation frequency.  The phase difference between the drain voltage and the shunt voltage is close to 90 degrees, which is probably indicating that you are close to, but not quite on, the resonant frequency.  There is no need to get excited about being on the resonant frequency, it just means that you would get a higher amplitude shunt resistor waveform.

In engineering terms, when you are operating at these higher frequencies, something akin to a "small signal" analysis is going on here, and the series RLC circuit is acting like a "filter" and responding to the given excitation frequency with a measurable amplitude and phase shift on the shunt resistor waveform.  It is not "resonating" per se, it is a filter that has it's own inherent resonant frequency that is responding to the excitation frequency.  If the excitation frequency is the same as the filter's resonant frequency then you will get a maximum amplitude waveform across the load resistor.

About 95% of the power being returned to the battery:  I have a sneaking suspicion that the the "black box" known as the battery is not very amenable to being charged when the charging waveform is 1/2 of a 190 KHz low amplitude current sine wave.  I would not be surprised if the battery "can't react" to this stimulus and in fact acts much more like a resistor dissipating the return energy.  So if you assume that when you conventionally charge a battery (including the Bedini way) that 70% of the charging energy becomes energy stored in the battery, then for this case I would not be surprised if only 5% or less of the charging energy becomes energy stored in the battery.

Anyway, this is all very interesting stuff with one caveat:  Here were are discussing how when a MOSFET is switched at a very high frequency (relative to the "normal" setup) then you are reduced to looking at small-signal quasi sine waves at a very low power levels as the capacitive effects associated with the MOSFET become significant.  One more time we are far far away from the Ainsley white paper and are basically spinning our wheels looking at effects that will not likely advance the quest to investigate the claim of COP > 17.  Nor do I think that the effects themselves are particularly interesting and there is nothing associated with any potential over unity to be found here.  We are in milliwatt territory here and I don't see this line of investigation helping the cause at all.  I view it as a dead end, and I thank you Poynt because I think that you just showed us where the dead end stops.

For a general message to the replicators including the Panacea duo and Glen:  Don't take your eyes off of the ball.  If you are going to try to work with a flavour of a "conventional" Ainsley circuit then you have to try to measure the electrical power in and the thermal power out.  That is what the goal for this whole experiment is, providing those two pieces of data.  It is great to see scope shots, and pictures of your setup, but you have to provide measurements to go along with your scope shots.

Also for the Panacea duo:  The 500-ohm trimpot that the gate signal goes through should be as close to the 555/MOSFET as possible.  You should not have it connected by long yellow wires because the square wave signal will be corrupted as it travels up and down the yellow wires.

MileHigh

[poynt99]

Hey MH.

Not sure where Harvey is going with this, but I capitulated for the benefit of all to hopefully gain a better understanding of what's going on with this circuit, both in the conventional 2.4kHz/3.7% drive mode, and in the aperiodic mode of operation.

I personally feel that the 555's part in all this is only unique in that it is able to cause this secondary trigger 800ns or so after each primary one. Aside from that, I believe that the same "effects" Harvey and Aaron et al have seen working down in these low levels can also be achieved simply by purposefully driving the MOSFET at these higher frequencies, i.e. in the 450kHz range. I have suggested they try this a couple times, and even done it myself in the sim, but who knows if anyone else will try it.

Regarding the phase issue, yeah I noticed that too. I could play with the period and PW to get things aligned, but as you say not sure if there would be anything to gain. It is interesting, and who'da thunk that the MOSFET and resistor would have formed a tank circuit LOL. We'll see what Harvey wants to do next.

Thanks for the comments, always welcome.

.99