Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

That is interesting since the formula's we've been using all these years is (N²r²) / 9r + 10l or in your syntax (N*N*r*r) / ((9*r) + (10 * l))

Ok...I have just corrected this post - a usually refers to area in most equations while d is often used for diameter. I knew something wasn't right with what I saw there - but having looked at it again, I can see a=diameter 

Silly post this is 

The formula is not my own. These are screen shots taken from:

http://www.captain.at/electronics/coils/

I have discussed this with Rosemary exhaustively, and the problem is that the actual spacing may in fact be a misprint. Rosemary assures us that the entire surface was used for winding save a bit on the ends for the terminals. However, the exact gauge of wire and the material in that wire are unknowns. You may wish to try 48 turns spread evenly across the 130mm (leaving ~10mm on each end for the terminals) and see what the inductance works out to.

Using 48 turns and 130mm length results in 16.08uH as shown.

.99

[Hoppy]

Harvey has raised some good points but the bottom line for me is that thermal measurements as advocated by Paul is probably going to give the most reliable method in terms of calculating system COP.

Surprisingly, this thread seems to have got back to an adult level and I have every confidence that Fuzzy, Poynt, Harvey & Paul will be able to reach a conclusion about OU on the Ainslie type circuit. I have held back from posting waiting for that silly inebriated PArt... troll to stop posting.


Hoppy

[PaulLowrance]

Post something complete please, with connection points to the circuit indicated as well. A full schematic would be very helpful for them, as opposed to kluged-together web pages.

The webpages provide all of the math equations, so it's very detailed. I thought it was very easy to connect the output of the 1st stage to the input of the 2nd stage. Electronics 101. 

Paul

[PaulLowrance]

.99,

BTW, as stated the other day, if you can find people who are going to use the circuit, then I'll build & test a circuit in spice, then post it. That's more time than I want to spend on this case now.

Paul

[poynt99]

Poynty  - ONLY YOU REQUIRE A DIFFERENTIAL PROBE.  IT'S AN ARBITRARY AND UNNECESSARY REQUIREMENT. 

Please note that the actual probes used and the method by which they are applied to the circuit is STRICTLY IN LINE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS DETAILED BY TEKTRONIX

You need to take your argument on a different tack.  This one is absolutely not acceptable.

This makes no sense. Please indicate with references the basis of these statements.

No need to reference Harvey's post, as I will be addressing that separately.

.99