Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[fuzzytomcat]

Hi everyone,

I did a short test on the Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Heater Circuit with a standard store bought 10 ohm 100 watt ( "MEMCOR" # FR100 ) load resistor, and after a short time the results were not as expected. The best arrangement for added gains in this circuit is to have the Mosfet source or Channel 1 to be the lowest mV as possible 30 to 70 is ideal but anything over 100 mV gains in circuit efficiency lowers.

The "load resistor" temperature was higher but so was the consumption of battery energy loosing .3 Volts every hour on my Fluke 87 DMM connection.

http://www.energeticforum.com/71062-post2961.html

Fuzzy

[Hoppy]

Hi everyone,

I did a short test on the Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Heater Circuit with a standard store bought 10 ohm 100 watt ( "MEMCOR" # FR100 ) load resistor, and after a short time the results were not as expected. The best arrangement for added gains in this circuit is to have the Mosfet source or Channel 1 to be the lowest mV as possible 30 to 70 is ideal but anything over 100 mV gains in circuit efficiency lowers.

The "load resistor" temperature was higher but so was the consumption of battery energy loosing .3 Volts every hour on my Fluke 87 DMM connection.

http://www.energeticforum.com/71062-post2961.html

Fuzzy

Large gains in battery capacity will be realised when discharge is well under the typical C20 discharge rate of a lead acid battery. Its the reverse of the 'Peukert Effect' where discharges above C20 have a non-linear impact on available capacity from a battery to cause rapid capacity loss when discharged at rates considerably above C20. Conversely, sub C20 very low discharges of a few tens of milliamps can increase the virtual capacity of a battery considerably, which is why some experimenters have been convinced that their systems are running close to OU when their batteries never seem to discharge to any extent over long periods of time. I have found that this effect is enhanced further when a battery is powering a pulsed inductive circuit such as the Ainslie one.

Hoppy

[MileHigh]

Rosemary and Harvey:

I apologize because you posed a few questions my way over the past week or two and I did not respond.  I was simply tired and taking a break.  From this perspective it feels like too much work to go back and plow through the old posts and respond.  If there is anything that is still a burning question please feel free to post again and I will try to reply this time round.

Hoppy:

Right on, brother!  lol  If you use the basic resistive output impedance model for the battery then you can do a thought experiment:  There is a basic property with respect to the energy lost in the battery vs. the load:  The higher the effective resistance of the load, the relative amount of energy lost in the battery compared to the energy dissipated in the load decreases.  When you have an impedance match between the battery and the load, then the maximum possible energy/power is transferred into the load, with exactly the same amount of power being dissipated inside the battery itself.  If the load keeps on going lower than that, then you reach a point where there is no power being dissipated in the load at zero ohms and all of the power gets dissipated in the battery.

So like you said, if you power a load with a very high impedance load like a watch or a tiny tiny motor, then the battery transfers almost all of its energy into the load.

You pay a price for a C20 discharge, you can extract less energy from the battery as compared to a much higher impedance load.

That is one more complication with running battery charge-discharge cycles when playing with your Bedini motor or whatever when it comes to COP tests.  This important factor related to how much useful energy you can extract from the battery vs. the load is normally not considered.  I have said before that I love to hate batteries.

This is a segway into a big downer comment related to the very high voltage (75 volts) one microsecond spikes we are seeing going back into the battery in this experiment.  Without ever having made any measurements, just based on experience and gut feel and logical deduction, I think that 99.9% of the energy in these spikes is just dissipated resistively in the battery.  I assume the battery chemistry is not supposed to work with that high an EMF plus the pulse is too short for some molecules to dance together and exchange any energy kisses - so the big voltage gradient through the battery itself is just a resistive burn and almost nothing else.

This is in contrast where we see people get excited about the high potential across the battery, thinking it must be good.  It is not logical to just assume "more voltage is better" in this case.  This comment is not specific to "the gang" here because I know that the vast majority of people on the other threads would be excited too if they peeked in to see what was going on around here.

So, I don't want to spoil the 75-volt spike party, just give my honest opinion, here is what is happening more or less:  The MOSFET switches on and the inductive resistor burns off some energy and also stores some energy.  Then the MOSFET switches off and the stored energy smacks into the MOSFET and also charges the stray and drain-source capacitance.   The "invisible" capacitor then discharges through the battery and the shunt resistor and the body diode of the MOSFET.  Most of the energy in this discharge is dissipated in the battery as heat, it does not recharge the battery.  Sprinkle in a bit of ringing for seasoning that that's your gameplay.

When you switch over to "resonance" or "oscillation" mode, you start to scramble the brains of the 555.  The "resonance mode excitation" induces exactly the same type of response in the circuit as described above, but now it is not a nice even pulse stream any more, the 555 is croaking and/or the timing is random or quasi-random.  It doesn't really matter, the key is that the response of the circuit is always as described above, but now it is chopped up and abbreviated, restarted, etc, etc.

The important thing to understand is that the "response envelope" is as described above and is always fundamentally the same, but now the "MOSFET excitation" has gone slightly screwy.  When I say "MOSFET excitation" here I am not talking about the input signal at the gate, I am talking about the actual MOSFET drain-source switch itself - that is the agent that is "exciting" the circuit and the whole circuit slaves to what the MOSFET switch "decides to do."

I am sure that I am wrong in some of the specifics, but I believe the overall explanation of the operating principle for the regular mode and the (random) oscillation mode is sound.

Any takers?  lol

MileHigh

[Rosemary Ainslie]

MileHigh

Firstly I have no idea how power gets dissipated in a battery.  Then I take it that you're saying that 'up' the amperage or 'reduce' it below certain values then you get battery vagaries kicking in that change the battery ratings?  I'm sure no-one will argue with this.  But your deduction that the 'spike' does nothing for the battery other than to result in a 'resistive burn' may very well be due to your own vagaries of logic. This goes back to the first question here.  And the '75-volt spike party'? - that is the first time i've seen a number represented as a euphemism.

But that aside, experience and 'gut feel' have very little to do with the logic that you claim to apply here.  In fact I think the terms are mutually exclusive.  How does your 'gut feel' react to an evident increase in battery voltage?  Or an evident reduction in 'draw down'?  Is that the point at which your logic kicks in - and you decide that the facts are somehow belied by the evidence?  A sort of reverse logic that sits better with your gut feel? 

And then the 'sprinkle in a bit of ringing for seasoning'.  Again.  This is exactly the point where the voltage can no longer benefit the battery.  Surely?  But you add it?  I would have thought that this may account for the fact that one side of the resistor can be hotter than another even when it's positioned parallel to the ground.

And the MOSFET slave switch?  That's extraordinary.  If it is capable of returning energy to the batery then it has to have enough wattage to breach the impedance of the battery.  Can you somehow logically explain this?

And finally when can you be both wrong and right in any explanation?  Frankly, I preferred you when you were tired.  You were way more articulate then.

     

Edit.  Witsend

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Mh.  Actually ignore the previous.  Definitely inpsired by a case of the blues.  And still there.  Glad at least you're up and about and fighting fit.  Wish I was.

rosie

and why are we not getting Poynt's data?  It looms.