Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

By request, from MileHigh over at EF:

I will offer some more details for a suggested measurement system.

The shunt resistor should be moved to the battery postive terminal, that way you can record the voltage drop across the shunt and derive your source voltage and current with a single recording channel. The recording channel could come from a digital storage scope that can export it's data to a PC or a PC-based oscilloscope. It would preferably be 10-bit or higher resolution and have a sampling rate high enough to get you enough sample points per cycle (500 or more?). It may be necessary to tweak the value of the shunt resistor to provide a sufficient voltage range to match the A/D conversion range of the recording device. The A/D recording device should be checked against your most accurate digital multimeter at the low shunt voltages to see if they are in accord and if not derive any required offset and gain values to compensate for any sampling inaccuracies. These compensation calculations can be done during the Excel preprocessing. It goes without saying that the actual value of the shunt resistor must be measured as accurately as possible.

All of the recorded data could be imported into Excel. A good person with Excel could massage it and turn it into voltage and current plots over time, compute the average power over one cycle, etc.

On the thermal side, you first have to turn the resistor-coil and the diode into a single thermal entity. All that you have to do is affix the diode up against the body of the resistor-coil and embed the diode in thermal paste. This assembly should be suspended in air by the two wires connected to the rest of the circuit. With about three inches of bare wire on each side of the resistor-coil-diode assembly, and by having it suspended about five or more inches above the desktop, and by ensuring that the air circulation during various tests remains the same, you can create a controlled, repeatable thermal environment for making tempreature readings. This setup only conducts heat to the outside world by air convection and radiation, and not through physical contact with other surfaces, which is what you want. Depending on the size of the resistor, this setup will probably reach 99% of the way to thremal equilibrium within 10 or 15 minutes. Let's just assume it is ten minutes for purposes of this discussion. If you are going to use a non-contact LASER/infrared temperature measuring device, it must be mounted on a tripod and always point at the same place. With a thremocouple, this is not an issue.

Suppose that the resistor-coil will only dissipate a maximum of two watts. That can be sliced into 20 parts, and you can run a thermal profile for every 0.1 watt incrememt in power dissipated in the suspended resistor-coil-diode thermal assembly. So you set up your variable DC power supply to put exactly 0.1 watts of power through the thermal assembly, wait ten minutes until the temperature has stabilized, and record the final temperature, then do it for 0.2 watts, wait, 0.3 watts, wait, etc. After about three hours you will have enough data points to plot a delta-temperature (y-axis) vs. power (x-axis) thermal profile curve in Excel. i.e.; a delta-temperature vs. wattage graph. Of course you should try to keep a fixed ambient temperature in the room for these tests.

Finally, you run the actual setup with the 3% duty cycle waveform, wait 10-15 minutes, and record the final temperature and record your shunt resistor waveforms. Then export the waveforms into the Excel spreadsheet that has been setup to do all of the number crunching mentioned above, and calculate the average electrical power consumed by the setup over one cycle. Then take your temperature reading and compare it to your delta-temperature vs. wattage graph and get the thermal power dissipated during the actual operation of the circuit.

Compare the electrical power with the thermal power and the answer will finally be found.

I just outlined what I think is a reasonably accurate approach for determinining if the circuit does what it claims to do or not. If somebody has any other suggestions for doing this I am sure that we would all be interested in hearing them. And of course the real question is the issue of whether somebody who believes in this circuit is actually going to do it and make the measurements and crunch the data.

[TinselKoala]

Re the Ground Loop issue:
The GL was brought up first, not by me, but by someone else who, I thought, was suggesting it as a possible source of error in my measurements; I showed in various ways that it was not, and in the process showed that an improperly grounded and energized system could show GL effects that would skew results; and we now see that the GL explanation FOR AINSLIE's RESULTS is unlikely to be correct.

But we would not have KNOWN this without exploring the issue and testing hypotheses (and indeed we still do not know it, strictly speaking).

So for jibb to dismiss that work as being a time-waster or irrelevant is kind of disingenuous. But I understand that all bits and pieces of my work are being gone over with that nitcomb...even though someone else has the nits.

[TinselKoala]

Thanks .99. for posting that from MileHigh. That's the protocol I referred to in a few earlier posts for 0c.
There are lots of ways to do it but I see nothing wrong with MH's protocol. First, though, one must know the circuit and the waveform parameters to test. Apples and oranges, remember?


EDIT: And, of course, if you want to see some real data generated by actually running a protocol essentially the same as above, look back a few pages and you will find my pictures of the raw data sheets, containing ALL the necessary information to see for oneself that I, at least, saw no excess heat from my Ainslie replication so far. But we all know my mosfet wasn't oscillating--and I pointed out at the time that it makes my results usable only as baselines.
That pesky load...chosen for its inductance of 8.64 microHenries. How was that measured, I wonder? The leads alone of my cheapo (not really!!) inductance meter read about 2 microhenries just by themselves.

A CALCULATION based on the quoted physical dimensions in the Ainslie article, though, comes very close.
What is the story here? Was the inductance of the Ainslie load measured or calculated?

See, these are very real questions and they have not been realistically answered.

EDIT: one of my raw data sheets is here, the other in the file section for download. Crunch away!
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7620.msg192047#msg192047

[TinselKoala]

I should point out that DrStiffler has, on the energeticforum, shared details of his calorimetric load, which is, I believe, the closest LOAD to Ainslie's load parameters that is being used, and his temperature measurements are, I believe, precise and reliable. He has not reported any recent results that I can find, though.

In any case, Rosemary's allegations that heat measurements are not being done, are clearly in error.

[jibbguy]

Lol you don't like being thrown on the "Defensive", i don't blame you, no one does

Well except maybe my ex-wife whom i suspect enjoyed controversy and argument for its own sake

This 555 timer being the issue is another example of what i was saying about throwing up anything to see what sticks. Maybe you are so emerged in this that you don't realize it.

I must have changed maybe 200 555's in my solder-soldiering days: Ive never seen one go into oscillation.

(but they are weak as hell and sometimes they would die if you look at them crossly)

I think the probably reason for this is the associated control R's and C's which won't let them.

Now regarding the Clarke-Hess... Having actually written the drivel that goes on instrument Data Sheets and Brochures before, i am rarely impressed and have learned to read between the lines. And it is a Power Meter, what even else it is marketed as.... No Project Engineer in their right mind would use this specifically for transient capture and troubleshooting... And that is the real-world Application that most fits what we are trying to do here imo. They now use fast sample-rate Data Acquisition (which are the modern equivalent and direct replacement for oscillographic chart recorders), or Digital Storage Oscilloscopes. The DAS systems are prefered because they can be set up with Capture Triggers (including "Pre-Trigger" to look at events leading up to the Trigger), for untended operation to "catch" transient spikes... Which if happening in very high-current devices like cascaded relays or giant SCR's, can cause huge havoc to other electronics in the area (lol, these spikes that can knock out a computer half a KM away on a factory floor.. The PC's being on a SEPARATE AND TOTALLY CLEAN GROUND, are what convinced me that Free Energy is REAL in the first place.. They are actually "Longitudinal" waves imo, like what Tesla experienced, and they happen every day in heavy industry Anyway, this is a major application for data acquisition in the real world, and peeps have spent many years working on it.  BTW: This kind of "triggering" has nothing to do with scope triggers; it is a means of starting to store sample data via a certain event (since no one wants to store more of these samples than they need to). 
 
I am sure it is an excellent power meter, but my main complaint about using it is this: We cannot see the actual signal through it. And the actual signal in this case, will hold much more interest than just the RMS reading. Because we could possibly overlay that to a second simultaneous-stored channel and do timing comparisons or power multiplications, or we can analyze it any number of fun ways such as Integration or FFT. In a non-storing power meter.. It's just gone forever. 

As for the issue of a crummy home PC's processor, and crappy USB connections, whatever... Used to analyze sample data:

WHAT REALLY MATTERS in a Data Acquisition System (or DSO that sends sample data to a PC which is essentially the same thing); is the signal capturing "train": 

1) The "Front End"; be it a separate Signal Conditioner / Amplifier that pre-conditions the signal, or just the input circuit of the device itself. Percent accuracy, full scale voltages allowed, if it can read "off-ground" safely or not, etc.

2) The Digital Resolution of the "A to D"  ("12 bit" is common now and is fine for most applications, "8 bit" is a waste of time and "10 bit" will do for most stuff). Why "8 bit" suxx, is because that means there are only 256 "steps" in the "x - axis" Full Scale;  and this can look rather "stair steppy" and fine accuracy suffers. If you are reading  "5V full scale", divide that by 256 = "19.5 mV" of resolution. Boo. Divide that by "12 bit" / 4096 bits = "1.2 mV" of res... Cool!

3) The User-set Sample Rate, which is crucial for insuring no important data is lost through Digital Signal Aliasing (sampling too slow). Usually as rule of thumb, you want 10 samples per the fastest waveform you want to capture in order to get good y-axis resolution. Now with repetitive sine waves, you can get by with as few as 4 samples per cycle and the scope will try to "fill in the blanks", but the problems with this should be apparent when doing Transient work.

4) As is true with any instrumentation, the actual analog Frequency Response of that "Front End" and thus the entire system is of course of key importance. It won't help much to sample at "20 MHz" if the F Response of your amplifier is "100kHz".

Once the Samples are captured; they could be sent to either the latest gen Cray Supercomputer, or a POS 5-year old laptop with dead streaks in the screen that smells like old cigar smoke and chair farts... And my point is, this data can be sent ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD for analysis, and that's why i think it's ideal for Open Source (ideal except for the price of this stuff lol).

So i was glad to hear that you can procure the use of a DSO, because this can cut through a lot of crap, and i really do think it or something that captures samples will be required in the end to either PROVE, or DISPROVE to everyone's satisfaction (well let's not get carried away lol... THAT will never happen! But you guys know what i mean).