Quote from: MileHigh on May 10, 2012, 12:22:40 AMAnd So had to know that your comments about us being incompetent with respect to power analysis were all nonsense from the beginning.

Not actually MileHigh.  That's what you're 'spinning'.  It is FAR, FAR, FAR from the 'real truth'.  LOL

Quote from: MileHigh on May 10, 2012, 12:22:40 AMSome kind of very strange psychological processes are going in your head.  You need to calm down and take a breath and come back to your normal emotional center of gravity.  Your crazy irrational combative comments have to stop.

Not actually... AGAIN.  I think the ONLY combative comment I may have made was that it is my opinion that TK is a 'sad little man'.  And that's hardly combative.  IF you are looking for evidence of 'combat' then study the expletives and invectives in TK's posts.  That would CERTAINLY be appropriate.  My psychological 'processes' seem of inordinate interest to you.  I have ALWAYS enjoyed a good argument.  So.  It's true that I'm deprived of that opportunity as their arguments have been far from good.  But I have never cared less if I stand for a minority opinion.  Its comfort is always that it's my own.  And my emotional center of gravity is VERY sound.  If it were NOT then I would not be here - competently contesting all these really 'thin' arguments.  And rather enjoying the challenge - IF such it is.  LOL.

Quote from: MileHigh on May 10, 2012, 12:22:40 AMLook at this comment from you:
>>And with it they've also blackened any hope of authority to comment on any power measurements EVER again

That comment is complete nonsense, and it was at the start of the lunacy.

Not actually.  I would caution anyone to take a good look at any of their allegations related to power measurements if they are SERIOUSLY proposing that wattage from a switched cycle can be represented by any value that is NOT qualified over time.  Otherwise they are not talking power.  They're talking 'fiction'.

Quote from: MileHigh on May 10, 2012, 12:22:40 AMYou have to get your batteries and run your dim bulb tests.  That is your best course of action.  If you can share your test procedure with us we can comment and hopefully agree on how to go about it.  There is no reason for that discussion to degenerate into the surreal irrational idiocy that just took place on this thread over the past 48 hours.

The surreal idiocy was NOT my idiocy.  The degeneration of this thread is hardly capable of further degeneration.  And I most certainly WILL NOT apply to your or your 'teams' VAUNTED knowledge about the test parameters - ever.  I need those protocols to be established FAIRLY - JUDICIOUSLY - and PROFESSIONALLY. 

Quote from: MileHigh on May 10, 2012, 12:22:40 AMYou need to pull yourself together and work cooperatively with us to do your tests.  If you say that we can't help you because we are incompetent and you need to get "endorsement from academics" then you will be starting the whole ugly irrational bitter struggle one more time - for nothing.

My dear MileHigh.  If you think - for one moment - that I or any of our team will engage with this thread on any serious basis at all - then it is you who are somewhat overly hopeful.  We need that much required 'professional impartiality'.  And that is SORELY lacking - depending as it does on the 'spin' that is 'spun' with all that hand waving and with it - all that tar brush painting.  Way too obvious an objective. 

Kindest regards,
Rosie Pose.

Rosemary,

Attached is Ohm's law (Drawing use U for Volt but you can also use V for Volt).
U = Volt, I = Ampere, R = Resistance and P = Watt.

Now take your battery voltage and find current through your Load + RdsOn (for your mosfet it is 2 Ohm).
In case you battery voltage is 62 Volt and your load is 10 Ohm and your mosfet RdsOn is 2 Ohm.

I = U / R = 62 Volt / 12 Ohm = 5,17 Ampere. So when the mosfet is on there is 5,17 Ampere flowing.

This gives P = U * I = 62 * 5,17 = 320,3 Watt at the Load + RdsOn. Now the ON period is only 12.2% of one second.
So the wattage for one second is: 39,08 Watt per Second to your LOAD + RdsOn.

Now how much is going to the LOAD and how much is burned as heat in the RdsOn?

62 Volt over both resistances. This mean 10,3 Volt over RdsOn and 51,67 Volt over 10 Ohm LOAD.
So, P = U * I = 51,67 * 5,17 = 267,12 Watt, now 12.2% over load and for one second = 21,89 Watt per Second to 10 Ohm LOAD.
39,08 total -  21,89 = 17,19 Watt per Second to RdsOn as heat.

You can use the Ohm's Law for other numbers if you wish and I hope I got the math right. :-)

GL.

And FINALLY I've seen this post.  It's a DOOZY.

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 01:19:30 AM
I've been reading over her old forum threads and it's easy to see the deterioration in her thinking over the past three years. There have been so many of her lies and errors and distortions and episodes of sheer ignorance exposed, like this latter one, that her ego integrity is severely threatened and all her defense mechanisms are in full deployment. I really hope that she's got people nearby who understand her and can take care of her properly.

More of that projection?  Leon.  I am entirely satisfied that these last three years have GREATLY increased my understanding.  Especially about the role that you and picowatt play.  Do you realise that if you did not have picowatt to converse with you'd have NO argument.  FTC and PhiChaser contribute NOTHING but a rather infantile 'crush' on you - based on your 'bully tactics'. 

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 01:19:30 AMIt's cruel in a way to be torturing and taunting her the way I do, I suppose.  But it's just so easy, when she keeps sticking her nose out for another whacking. I'm looking at it lately as the same kind of thing that an owner of three dogs has to do daily, to keep the back yard safe for foot traffic. An odious chore, done with a certain chagrin and wrinkled nose perhaps, but absolutely necessary if one is to walk freely without making a misstep.

LOL.  I really enjoy this little paragraph.  It would pre-suppose that you are 'effective' before you can claim 'cruelty'.  This is hysterical.  When a little dwarf applies a feather duster to anything at all - then the result is a 'tickle' - AT BEST.  And that walking 'freely' ... bit?  What a JOKE.  My DEAR Leon.  If this is what you consider CRUEL - then disabuse yourself.  You may look like Hitler - and you may even share his height challenges.  But you CERTAINLY are not effective.  But how SWEET.  You actually think that you're cruel?  That you're busy training 'dogs'?  Long may you enjoy these fantasies of yours.  They seem to satisfy you somewhat.   

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 01:19:30 AMReading those old posts one can almost see a childlike innocence and enthusiasm, something that's not evident any more. Now there's just this bitterness and desperation in her tone, and she clutches at whatever straws she can, but sadly, without her advisors to help her, she's slipping further and further away down the rabbit hole.

Indeed. I was excessively naive.  I assumed that Open Source and dedicated energy forums were actually what they professed to be.  I've learned MUCH.  Especially the role that you and picowatt play.  Jibbguy has LOTS to say about this.  It's the way that you guys supplement your incomes.  And in your case - it's the way you actually pander to your rather challenged little ego.  You're on a MISSION here TK.  I'm flattered that it warrants you every waking moment.  And I'm delighted to see how UTTERLY ineffectual you are.

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 01:19:30 AMI mean, look. She's been standing up arguing with her own hallucinations for the past two days, completely missing the point and contradicting herself multiple times, and making really basic math errors while misrepresenting and misquoting everybody on this forum and WIKI too... and yet she still has the temerity to show up day after day, bringing even more irrelevant and ignorant argument INSTEAD OF TESTING.

I LOVE that hallucinations thing.  Your even claimed that I'm hallucinating WORDS - whatever that means.  I've said it before.  IF they're hallucinations - then they're shared by MANY of us.  RAMPANT AND CONTAGIOUS.  That puts them into an over unity bracket all on their own. 


Rosie Pose

Hello Groundloop,

Quote from: Groundloop on May 10, 2012, 02:15:09 AM
Rosemary,

Attached is Ohm's law (Drawing use U for Volt but you can also use V for Volt).
U = Volt, I = Ampere, R = Resistance and P = Watt.

Now take your battery voltage and find current through your Load + RdsOn (for your mosfet it is 2 Ohm).
In case you battery voltage is 62 Volt and your load is 10 Ohm and your mosfet RdsOn is 2 Ohm.

I = U / R = 62 Volt / 12 Ohm = 5,17 Ampere. So when the mosfet is on there is 5,17 Ampere flowing.

This gives P = U * I = 62 * 5,17 = 320,3 Watt at the Load + RdsOn. Now the ON period is only 12.2% of one second.
So the wattage for one second is: 39,08 Watt per Second to your LOAD + RdsOn.

Now how much is going to the LOAD and how much is burned as heat in the RdsOn?

62 Volt over both resistances. This mean 10,3 Volt over RdsOn and 51,67 Volt over 10 Ohm LOAD.
So, P = U * I = 51,67 * 5,17 = 267,12 Watt, now 12.2% over load and for one second = 21,89 Watt per Second to 10 Ohm LOAD.
39,08 total -  21,89 = 17,19 Watt per Second to RdsOn as heat.

You can use the Ohm's Law for other numbers if you wish and I hope I got the math right. :-)

GL.

I am entirely satisfied that you've got your math right.  And I'm also satisfied that this is very nearly what our resistor is dissipating during that short on period.  So.  WELL DONE.  As ever.  You're the ONLY one who is still coming up with appropriate measurements. 

Thanks Groundloop,
Kindest regards,
Rosie

BTW - what I'm arguing is what happens to that heat during the second half of each duty cycle.  It is not, as you've conceded - appropriate to the full duty cycle.  During the second half of each duty cycle then that dissipation is - at best - somewhat less.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on May 10, 2012, 03:23:36 AM
Hello Groundloop,
I am entirely satisfied that you've got your math right.  And I'm also satisfied that this is very nearly what our resistor is dissipating during that short on period.  So.  WELL DONE.  As ever.  You're the ONLY one who is still coming up with appropriate measurements. 

Thanks Groundloop,
Kindest regards,
Rosie

BTW - what I'm arguing is what happens to that heat during the second half of each duty cycle.  It is not, as you've conceded - appropriate to the full duty cycle.  During the second half of each duty cycle then that dissipation is - at best - somewhat less.

Rosemary,

Just to be absolute clear about it, the energy transferred to the 10 Ohm load is 21 Watt per Second.
I have alread calculated in the 12.2% ON time. So you can NOT calculate the duty cycle twice!

I have already explained to you what happen during the fuction generator OFF cycle. The -12 Volt
pulse from the function generator acts like a battery in series with the main battery. So the function
generator is injecting some energy INTO the circuit. This energy will reduce the average energy usage from
the main battery. The theoretical input the function generator will have is 2.88 Watt since the internal resistance
of the function generator is 50 Ohm. In real life it is less. So for each period of  87,8% of the duty cycle
the function generator input energy of approx. 2,6 Watt per Second. This means that at every OFF cycle the
main battery can provide 2,6 Watt per Second less to the load.

GL.