Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Harvey]

@Mile High,

I agree that a 556 (dual timer) staged setup would provide more flexibility in frequency control and duty cycle. It will be good to isolate the cause of the increased frequency which many have proven exists. If it is a self resonance between the xFET and the inductor then that is one thing, and if it is a feedback into the 555 then that is another.

As mentioned above, energy that finds its way from the 24V supply through the gate circuit and back to the negative rail is not seen by the current sensing resistor that exists between the transistor and the negative terminals of the batteries. If the current sensing resistor is between the positive rail and the inductor, then that energy would be included in the readings, but may interfere with any inductor battery interaction.

There are a couple of things that some may want to explore.
1. Sympathetic energy external to the circuit that may add to the magnetic field energy. Theoretically, magnetic fields are infinite - the field of this inductor no doubt crosses other fields both in the RF and local wiring spectrums. The conditions may allow extraction of energy from those other sources. This goes back to why we need to treat a changing field as non-conservative.

2. Ionized air blanket. The action of the inductor at 143KHz and above, may result in Ionized air becoming attracted to the resistor body. This air will not move by normal convection and can function as a thermal insulator prohibiting normal thermal dissipation and the subsequent over heating of the device compared to the baseline. The Oil Bath tests would alter the results significantly if this is the case.

[Harvey]

LOL
just look back at the last 100 pages of this thread!

Point well taken, please read as "modified Ainslie Circuit"

[Hoppy]

@Hoppy
Quote:
"I agree with you and I think even Aaron will agree that the spike has miniscule power in EE terms. However, as I'm sure you know, the 'spike' to Aaron, John Bedini and others has extra special significance, in that they claim the spike acts as a trigger mechanism for battery self-charging in the right conditions. It is pointless trying to argue this point, as it is a fundamental belief based on an esoteric 'New Age' theory."

LOL, this statement----"I agree with you and I think even Aaron will agree that the spike has miniscule power in EE terms", tells me how little you and MH actually understand of Electrical Engineering. If fact the spike is an called an "inductive discharge" which is EQUAL to the power required to charge the inductance at resonance. The power in equals the power out minus ohmic losses--- this is resonance, Power is Volt-Amps or Watts. While the inductive discharge is at a higher voltage and a lower amperage the power is almost equal to the power input in Watts at resonance. So how exactly can the POWER in the inductive discharge or "spike" be miniscule when in fact it is nearly equal to the power input? Is this one of YOUR new age theories, because it violates the conservation of energy, energy cannot just dissappear?
AC

@AC

I'm talking about a ''spike' when the switch closes, not the complete  discharge from an inductor - different things entirely! John Bedini is on record as saying that he is not interested in what happens after the switch closes. Its obvious that an inductor will discharge the energy used to charge it minus losses and that this level of energy is not miniscule, otherwise how on earth would a forward converter function.

Hoppy

[MileHigh]

Hoppy:

Thank you for your comments about the "New Age" battery theory.  That's the claim for Bedini motors.  Interestingly enough if you look around this web site and elsewhere for people that have tried to do serious measurements on their batteries after cycling them back and forth with their Bedini motor setups, they state that there is no over unity found.  I can't give you a link but I am pretty sure that there is a thread about that very subject on this site.  Also, a typical Bedini motor spike back into the charging battery will most likely have millions of times more energy than the sub 500 nanosecond pulse that Aaron pointed out.

We also can't forget that the Ainsley white paper is not about the battery at all, but free energy believers are drawn to batteries and we have seen that happen repeatedly here.

AC:

LOL, this statement----"I agree with you and I think even Aaron will agree that the spike has miniscule power in EE terms", tells me how little you and MH actually understand of Electrical Engineering. If fact the spike is an called an "inductive discharge" which is EQUAL to the power required to charge the inductance at resonance. The power in equals the power out minus ohmic losses--- this is resonance, Power is Volt-Amps or Watts. While the inductive discharge is at a higher voltage and a lower amperage the power is almost equal to the power input in Watts at resonance. So how exactly can the POWER in the inductive discharge or "spike" be miniscule when in fact it is nearly equal to the power input? Is this one of YOUR new age theories, because it violates the conservation of energy, energy cannot just dissappear?

To regain focus for all of us, especially considering it is easy to mix up terms, you typically talk about the total energy in a pulse, and even though the instantaneous power can be quite high, the total pulse energy can still be quite low.  The higher the load resistance the discharging coil-resistor sees, the shorter the pulse and the higher the power.

The energy in the sub 500 nanosecond pulse going back to the battery can be expected to be a fraction of the initial discharge energy coming from the inductive part of the coil-resistor.  I think that is fair to say that it will be much less than 10% just by eyeballing the DSO display.  So there is no equality going on here.  Most of the energy will be lost in the switched-off MOSFET when the coil tries to "push forwards" after the MOSFET switches off.

The only resonance related effects here will be related to the standard ringing and related effects.  The circuit itself as a functioning system does not resonate.

So how exactly can the POWER in the inductive discharge or "spike" be miniscule when in fact it is nearly equal to the power input? Is this one of YOUR new age theories, because it violates the conservation of energy, energy cannot just dissappear?

Again, it is worth repeating that you are wrong here.  The discharging inductive component in the coil-resistor will dump most of it's energy into the highest resistance element in the circuit path, and that would be the switched-off MOSFET.  The return spike to the battery is just a reflection of energy back due to ringing and related effects.  There is no violation of conservation of energy and I would assume that in setups without the fly-back diode the MOSFETs will start to get hot quite quickly.

...tells me how little you and MH actually understand of Electrical Engineering

From Wikipedia:

The Big Lie (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".

George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four refers to the Big Lie theory on several occasions. For example:

    * “The key-word here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts”. [6]
    * “To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed...”.

MileHigh

[Hoppy]

@Mile High,

I agree that a 556 (dual timer) staged setup would provide more flexibility in frequency control and duty cycle. It will be good to isolate the cause of the increased frequency which many have proven exists. If it is a self resonance between the xFET and the inductor then that is one thing, and if it is a feedback into the 555 then that is another.

As mentioned above, energy that finds its way from the 24V supply through the gate circuit and back to the negative rail is not seen by the current sensing resistor that exists between the transistor and the negative terminals of the batteries. If the current sensing resistor is between the positive rail and the inductor, then that energy would be included in the readings, but may interfere with any inductor battery interaction.

There are a couple of things that some may want to explore.
1. Sympathetic energy external to the circuit that may add to the magnetic field energy. Theoretically, magnetic fields are infinite - the field of this inductor no doubt crosses other fields both in the RF and local wiring spectrums. The conditions may allow extraction of energy from those other sources. This goes back to why we need to treat a changing field as non-conservative.

2. Ionized air blanket. The action of the inductor at 143KHz and above, may result in Ionized air becoming attracted to the resistor body. This air will not move by normal convection and can function as a thermal insulator prohibiting normal thermal dissipation and the subsequent over heating of the device compared to the baseline. The Oil Bath tests would alter the results significantly if this is the case.

Harvey

With respect, there is no need to apply advanced physics to the design of a 555 timer that can provide a PWM output. The only problem is that the Aaron's latest modification offering does not work properly, its unstable and anyone who bothers to build it may even find it does not work at all!

Hoppy