Repost:

Rosemary:

Re: Request for documenting the test runs for the dim bulb testing.

It would not be desirable to see a dozen or more DSO captures in support of the dim bulb testing.  I would say that a maximum of four would be fine.  It goes without saying that the configuration of the circuit should be exactly the same for each capture.

For each DSO capture in support of the dim bulb testing we would like to know the details about the setup.  How many batteries, things like that.  We would like to see pictures of the setup.  We would like you to list the the DSO negative power measurement for each capture.  Therefore if you are going to use a 0.25 ohm current sensing resistor then you have to do the calculations to show us the measured negative wattage.  We also want to know what the function generator voltage is without it being connected to the circuit, for each capture.  So you measure it on the scope or with a multimeter, your choice, as long as you make the measurement.  We also would like to know what the current measurement in the running circuit is when checked with a digital multimeter.  If the digital multimeter is going crazy than use an analog multimeter.  We expect a few hundred milliamps of current flow so you ideally you would have an analog current meter with a full-scale deflection of zero to 500 milliamps, or a full-scale deflection of zero to one amp.

So you can imagine four captures with a text file that records the configuration and data for each capture.  If you want to be really nice you can put the whole thing into a spreadsheet.  There should be no resizing of the scope capture images.  You could also include the results of the dim bulb testing in the spreadsheet.  Then we can simply download the spreadsheet.

We want no ambiguities in the data because that causes doubt.  This is what open source is supposed to be all about.

I have just given you a few suggestions about documenting the "COP infinity" power measurements on the setup while the dim bulb test is running.  If you can think of any more things to add then please add them.  You know that you have been haunted by setup and circuit ambiguities in the past.  This is your chance to get it right and document yourself properly.

I would like to see you post acknowledging my posting and sharing your thoughts with us.

When do you expect to start the testing?

MileHigh

Er... ummmm... I hate to keep interrupting you with all these scopeshots... but here is another scoposcopy puzzle.

There is a point to these, and I really wish that they would be taken seriously.

The below is a screengrab blowup of a graphic Stefan prepared over a year ago. It is of course the CVR trace from one of RA's time-expanded oscillation shots. Stefan has colored the areas above and below the zero-voltage line.

The puzzle: How many red pixels are there? How many green pixels are there?  I don't know the answer. Yet.

(This can be determined fairly easily by most graphics programs, I think. Or you could blow the image up and count them all manually. This is Nobel-prize material, after all, you should be willing to do a little work for it.)

Report, compare, contrast, discuss.

Now, we do realize that the negative mean power product arises not only from the areas and the zerocrossings of the current signal but also from the amplitudes and areas of the battery trace that fluctuate above and below the battery's nominal voltage. So it would have been nice of Stefan to extend lines down from the zero-crossings of the CVR trace, down to the battery trace, with a line across that trace at the nominal voltage level, so _those_ areas could also be compared, and the areas themselves could then be multiplied. But this is what we've got and it's an interesting problem.

And TK - I think your own referenced scopshots BELIE this little 'spin' effort of yours...

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 16, 2012, 12:31:20 AM
Ah.. .but GL... you are talking about ONE mode of operation, and the NERDs have typically been operating either in BOTH modes, or the OTHER Mode.

That is, they use a negative bias current exclusively or for most of the time. In the negative bias mode the bias source and the main battery are in aiding series and so both contribute to the entire power in the circuit. They never operate in the Positive bias mode for more than 50 percent of the duty cycle and usually much less than that, and the "desired" mode is to not use the positive bias at all, just stay in the negative bias, oscillation mode. And in that mode, it is apparent that the bias source or FG  CAN add to the power in the load... I think.

How then do you explain that we get even GREATER power dissipated at the load when we apply a 50% duty cycle.  In FACT we've got samples where we have it ON more than OFF and STILL get a negative wattage.

You are truly insulting the intelligence of everyone who engages here.  And you do it with the reckless abandon of a loose cannon.

Rosie Pose

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on May 16, 2012, 12:44:18 AM
(snip)
If it weren't quite so insulting then it would REALLY be comical.  (snip)
Regards as ever,
Rosemary

Pot, kettle, black.

As I have said before, you are the most hypocritical person I have ever encountered outside of politics. You are the Red Queen of the veiled insult, the sly innuendo, the stabbing in the back of your former colleagues, the mendacious aspersion, the distorted reference, the malquote.

Regards as ever... but you are trying your level best to do me actual harm. You are indeed a piece of work, Ainslie.

Matthew 7:3-5.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on May 16, 2012, 01:19:19 AM
And TK - I think your own referenced scopshots BELIE this little 'spin' effort of yours...

How then do you explain that we get even GREATER power dissipated at the load when we apply a 50% duty cycle.  In FACT we've got samples where we have it ON more than OFF and STILL get a negative wattage.

You are truly insulting the intelligence of everyone who engages here.  And you do it with the reckless abandon of a loose cannon.

Rosie Pose

You fool. If you paid attention you might notice that I HAVE ASKED OUR PARTICIPANTS TO DO THEIR OWN MATH on that first shot you reproduced.

And I hope they do, because it shows that the HEAT IN THE LOAD comes mostly when THERE ARE NO MAGIC OSCILLATIONS.

And the negative power product has been explained to you so many times I can't count them and I KNOW you can't count them. Anyone can produce it with any number of component combinations and it is A MEASUREMENT ARTEFACT.