Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[hartiberlin]

Please Tinsel,
really try to trigger on the A-channel,
to see, how the hum really looks in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZzzMVx6rPY


Many thanks in advance...

[TinselKoala]

@Stefan:
Thanks for taking a look. The inductive ringdown appears to be in the 150-200 mHz range and my FG only goes to 2 MHz...I know that if I drive the circuit at that frequency the sine oscillations will be continuous as you say.
However, Rosemary constantly refers to 2.4 kHz as a "High" frequency and most of her reported work is with even lower freqs than that. My purpose here is and has always been to reproduce, or replicate if you like, the claims for the original COP>17 circuit, found in the Quantum article and the EIT.pdf file (in two different versions for the same experimental runs.)

So I am using her exact diagram, the exact component values (with variations for comparisons) and the exact electrical parameters including voltages, battery capacities, frequency and duty cycle as stated in her papers.

I am not interested here in exploring an entire problem space. Just the Ainslie circuit and claims. So far I have found many discrepancies.

The calculated resonance of a 0.00864 milliHenry load with minimal capacitance in its circuit, is, as you can appreciate, very high, and realistically to operate at that frequency and expect to get good measurements, one would have to be much neater and more shielded than any of us could hope to attain at home.

@jibbguy:
You are right of course, and if you look back at my vids and comments you will see that I have and do warn against the same things--perhaps in a bit more casual manner than you do ("I hope I don't kill myself, only crazy people try this, school of smoking oscilloscopes," etc.)
In my basement lab, and also where I work, if I still have a job that is, I have available line isolation transformers of the SOLA kind, that I can use if I need to isolate any of the equipment from the mains, including the mains ground or earth. The Fluke is of course always isolated by its power supply.

But the issue, I would have thought, is rather moot. Since, as shown, the FG and scopes are not isolated in these recent vids, even the isolated FLUKE will show the groundloop signal change when the Ainslie battery negative is disconnected from the circuit but the battery negative is earthed. If the other instruments were isolated, would the Fluke still show the GL? No, because then the circuit would have NO path to the negative of the battery and the circuit would not run at all.

Now, we are unable to determine the state of grounding, isolation, and proper order of connection of the circuit in Ainlsie's reports. There simply isn't enough information in the reports, and I trust "Ainslie said" even less than I trust "Steorn said."

So I recommend that further criticisms and questions about instrument hookups, possible groundloops, and the precautions taken to prevent them be directed to Ainslie. Because there is much less information about these issues concerning HER work than there is about mine, and this information may be critical to replicating her results.

As I thought I was illustrating in the recent videos.

@XLabs: There is no doubt that "A" 555 timer can be made to produce the short or long dutycycles, whatever.
The issue is that the EXACT circuit with the component values shown by Ainslie in the Quantum paper, and cleaned up by Groundloop in the diagram you posted, that circuit does not make the short duty cycles claimed, and in the Ainslie circuit will turn the transistor ON for 80-99 precent of the time and CANNOT be adjusted, with the components specified, to make short 0-20 percent ON duty cycles.
You will see what I mean if you just use the circuit Ainslie specified in the article, rather than designing a correct timer.

I went on and on about this because, as you can see for yourself if the posts haven't been removed, the folks over there would simply not believe that I was right for many days, until the reports of other builders started coming in....and now, the Ainslie 555 circuit error is being "swept under the rug", even though it isn't being CORRECTED in the publications...because some astute observers are finally getting the message that Ainslie's manual energy balance calculations depend on the Correct Duty Cycle going into the calculations...and the 555 timer error most likely means that when Ainslie thought she has 3.7 percent ON she actually had more like 96.3 percent ON...which point is also supported by her confusion, and that of others like Joit and Aaron, about the relationship between the gate signal and mosfet state, that caused me to make the increasingly simpler and simpler videos showing that relationship...

There are so many holes in the Ainslie story that I am genuinely appalled at the credence she is being given. At this point it is very nearly a "MyLOW" situation, if mylow had only showed you words and nothing else.
And the critics are criticising me, when it's clear that people like Joit and Ainslie herself need far more instruction in scope use and measurement
than I do.

Yes, this is the issue that got me kicked off that forum, but that suits me fine. Fascistic monarchies are not to my liking, especially if they are also "spiritually" oriented. The reek of hypocrisy always makes me seek cleaner air.

"Love and Light"...
--TK

[TinselKoala]

Please Tinsel,
really try to trigger on the A-channel,
to see, how the hum really looks in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZzzMVx6rPY


Many thanks in advance...

Hi Stefan
The Philips scope has a "line" triggering function, so that the line signal, whatever it is, becomes the scope trigger and signals at the line frequency can be separated from the other signals. Since the Ainslie oscillations are at 2.4 kHz about, and the line is at 60 Hz, there is no way to display both features simultaneously. As illustrated I cannot get the scope to trigger on the Ainslie "CH A" signal reliably when the GL is there--hence the appearance of "Aperiodic oscillations".... If I trigger on the mains, and use a timebase that is slow enough to show the 60 Hz amplitudes, then the 2.4 kHz becomes the "noise" and the trace still looks like garbage.
However, I will try to resolve the GL signal for you. It will be later tonight before I have a chance to try again.
Strangely, it is much different by night than by day. There may be some heavy electrical stuff on the line during daylight hours. Remember, Canada is a developed nation, but the veneer of development is very thin in spots. I don't trust the mains for reliability or signal purity, that's for sure.

[hartiberlin]

Hi TK,
yes, after seeing all your trials and experiments with all
your scope setups, etc..I believe, that Ainslie
has made some errors in her measurements or her
components might have already been damaged or
she had a amateur-radio neighbour broadcasting into her
circuit or some other weird things...
Or she has a much lower ringdown frequency in the Khz range
and she just excited it with the same frequency, so she had
stable oscillations..

Anyway, just better quit the Ainslie circuit and try to see, if you
can get some energy output from this groundloop setup and
better try the Kapanadze circuit to resonante on this groundloop
oscillation via some LC tank circuits and a transformer.

[TinselKoala]

Thanks, Stefan, I'll take a look, it's not something I am familiar with.

I see that MileHigh is making a lot of sense, but there's a minor issue or two that I would like to comment on. But I have to do it here.
First, I think the very best evidence that HV (relatively) spikes are making it back to the battery is this: Cheapo DMMs used to monitor battery voltage at the battery (WITHOUT filter caps!! None are shown in the Ainslie circuit!!) anyway, the Cheap DMMs will almost always flip out and show random fluctuations, caused by this HF component coming in from the circuit. You can see this in some of my vids; it was especially severe during the recent experimental run--you can see that I could not even record some readings--and you can even see it clearly with the HUGE inductive load that Joit is using. I love it when my detractors prove my points!
I can see it clearly on the analog scopes, and yes indeed MileHigh is right about the leads picking up signals like that...but the DMM is more remote and is picking up the spikes through its direct connection to the battery.
But MileHigh is also right that the energy in these spikes is miniscule and, even over the long periods we are discussing, cannot sum to anything like a significant charge return to the battery. What it CAN do is make what they call over there a "Fluffy Charge" (i love that term) whereby the battery's indicated no-load voltage is anomalously high wrt its actual energy content. Any charge scheme that spike-pulses a battery of certain chemistries will cause this effect. It's fooled a whole lot of folks, even ones with college educations. And it's still doing so.
So I believe the spikes to the battery are real, as .99 says and as Rosemary says. I also believe that they are not capable of significantly recharging the battery, as MileHigh says. So yes, Rosemary, they can both be right.

And to address the "techie" points that MH brings up: You bet these are important. Especially for those who are breadboarding. A close inspection of the pics of my build though will show that I have followed the good practices that MH recommends. For example, there are decoupling caps in the right places, the timer is hardwired on pad-per-hole phenolic board, the FG input is BNC, copper buswire is used for the basic connections; the 555 output to the Ainslie portion goes in by a 2" length of tiny coax, all points are soldered, even the crimpon connections to the header socket wires; I use a 200K linear pot in place of the 100 ohm attenuator in the gate drive line (This pot, btw, has a bad spot caused by an overload while testing a Darlington transistor in the circuit; you can see the noise from this rough spot in several of the vids).
I even put, with appropriate decoupling caps, a 78L12 regulator on the 555 board, since I sometimes power it with a higher-voltage wall-wart (not used in any of these tests!!).

On all tests I show, the 555 timer is always powered by its own separate 12-volt sealed lead-acid battery of 2A-h capacity. Which of course by necessity shares a common negative with the rest of the system.