Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hello Rosemary,
You are wellcome. And yes you are right, later i also tought it might be better together with you next post. Next time I respect that.

sincerely
Norbert

thanks again.

[otto]

Hello all,

@Rosemary

lets forget my last post. It was a long time ago.....lets concentrate on your setup. I have reeded finally your papers.

As Im curious like a little child I would have some questions, if you allow:

1. have you ever tried 2 or 3 different frequencies  in your setup?
2. ever tried to use a 470pF cap on pin 5 of the 555?
3. ever tried to use some MOSFET drivers?

As said, Im only curious nothing else.

Forgot it:

@G

thanks!! My PMs doesnt work.

Otto

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hello

As Im curious like a little child I would have some questions, if you allow:

1. have you ever tried 2 or 3 different frequencies  in your setup?
2. ever tried to use a 470pF cap on pin 5 of the 555?
3. ever tried to use some MOSFET drivers?

Hi Otto.  I've tried many different frequencies.  The circuit is not 'frequency dependent'.  In other words - that 'preferred mode of oscillation' is evident over a fairly broad range of frequencies.  What I used as a guide to the measure of efficiency was to watch the scope's DC average on the display.  When this stays relatively steady in a net negative value then I know that the frequency is working.  But each resistor has different optimal 'preferred' numbers.  It's a trial and error thing at the moment.

Your last two questions the simple answer is I'm not sure.  If by a 'different' mosfet driver you mean a functions generator - then yes.  It has been tested.  But not by me.  And I don't know if there's been a cap tried at the pin 5 of the 555.  But it's possible.  Again.  The significance of this would be entirely lost on me.

I hope that helps.  Sorry I can't answer this in more detail.  I only have a very generalised understanding of switches and invariably had technicians build these for me.  All I know is that a good quality pot is invaluable as I could do better 'fine tuning'. 

If you - or anyone - can put a switch design to the proposed schematic I've offered - that may be a very good thing.  If you're up for it.  I'ts required, and probably best managed with a 'reed type' switch or some such.  We'll be building our own - in due course - and will post the full schematic when it's to hand. 

The switch for the MOSFET is another story.  That design is likely to be complex as the object is to have absolute control on the waveform generated through that inductance.  But again.  I'm relying on the input of experts.  I am NOT an expert.  I hardly even qualify as a novice.  LOL.

Regards,
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Guys, just to bring your attention to the 'edit' in Norbert's post on the schematic.  We're proposing to use Nickle Metal Hydride batteries.  This should be doable.

Regards,
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/aetherevarising

[nul-points]

hi Rosemary

if i understand your suggested battery-load-battery disposition correctly, i think this configuration can often be seen in a number of existing circuits (eg. Bedini & Joule Thief battery-charge applications) so i don't think you should have any problem finding battery combinations which work together

the same principle also crops up in the notoriously misnomered 'Tesla Switch' cct - only in this latter example there are usually 4 batteries which get connected in pairs via the load

hope this provides some useful context for you


i've managed to read a lot of your posts on Scribd now and found them very interesting, especially about the concepts of the innate energy in the cct components being released in opposition to the applied source dipole energy (eg. Counter EMF) and also that of the Universal magnetic dipole

...the 'zipon' - what a wonderful name for a particle which travels at 2c !...

i need to do some more reading & thinking on your ideas


all the best
sandy

[EDIT]...
PS   i think Otto's reference to 'MOSFET drivers' was asking if you'd tried using the task-specific chips which are often used as an interface between a pulse source (such as function generator or 555, etc) and the final MOSFET switch - they are specifically designed to match the drive-characteristics of MOSFET type devices, whereas the 555, for example, is a general-purpose signal source chip

(i suspect that the use of such a device might interfere with the 'spontaneous' nature of the drive waveform which your effect requires)