Dear little TK,

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 23, 2012, 11:35:12 PM
What a liar you are! Not only did I repeat your data nearly exactly, including your heat profiles, I also exposed your duty cycle error and I was the FIRST to ACTUALLY boil water with your circuit, as well as charging batteries and capacitors to high voltages. Your memory is failing you, Little Miss Mosfet.

LOL  Not actually.  NEVER did you manage that oscillation.  It was LAUGHABLE.  We all saw you trying.  HARD.  And CLAIMING that you did.  But you were miles off course.  So all you subsequently demonstrated was just ridiculously inappropriate.  I actually started to feel sorry for you.  Not even FTC could replicate it.  Not until I spent hours on the line with him trying to explain what was needed.  The only one who romped to target with the skill of a homing pigeon was Aaron.  Sadly he lost interest within the month.   I think he was rather discouraged by your own contributions. 

Rosie Pose

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 24, 2012, 03:19:57 AM
Guys, I LOVE this one. 
IT IS NOT BEING READ INCORRECTLY.  CAN'T BE DONE.  NOT POSSIBLE.  The setting of the coupling is DC.  It should be AC.  Either picowatt doesn't understand the implications or he hopes no-one else does.  Strange.  It was IMMEDIATELY understood by our EXPERTS.  God forbid we discover he hasn't a clue about those different couplings and how the zero reference adjusts accordingly.  Then we'd be inclined to doubt the very expertise he tries so hard to pretend.

Regards as ever,
Rosemary

If you truly believe the above, then why don't you print out a copy of FIG3, point a little arrow at the positive portion of the FG cycle, and fax it to LeCroy with "what is this voltage?".

Sadly, I must inform you that everything you wrote in this post only demonstrates your lack of skill in reading/using a 'scope.

If it were not for the 'scope being DC coupled, I would be unable to state what the actual voltage being applied to the gate of Q1 is.  If you knew about AC/DC coupling, this would need no explanaton.  Sorry...

There is +12 volts being applied to the gate of Q1 in FIG 3.  This is fact, confirmed by LeCroy.

So what's up with Q1?

And now it seems that I've erred.  LOL.  Picowatt NEVER claimed that there's anything wrong with our MOSFET.  He's talking about something else.  How curious?

Quote from: picowatt on June 24, 2012, 03:11:42 AM
And once again you demonstrate that you know nothing of what you speak.  TK and I were not even discussing your circuit.  Maybe try reading a bit slower.

And again, your only argument to date regarding Q1 not turning on in FIG3 and FIG7 has been that the 'scope is being read incorrectly.  Did you bother to show .99's annotated capture to your 'scope calibration guy as you said you were going to do?  Of course you did not.  If you did, you would also now realize that there is indeed +12 volts being applied to the gate of Q1 in FIG 3 which should turn Q1 on.  The CSR trace clearly demonstrates that Q1 is not turning on.

So, again, why is Q1 not turning on when it clearly should be?

The question is constantly repeated because it is never answered and no corrections made.

You are starting to look like Mylow...

I distinctly recall that one of the options that he rather PONDEROUSLY pretended - was that our Q1 had blown open or blown closed - or something?  Perhaps I did, indeed, ENTIRELY misunderstand him.  Who knows?

Regards again
Rosemary

And guys - it seems that picowatt is nothing if not repetitive.

Quote from: picowatt on June 24, 2012, 03:28:23 AM
Sadly, I must inform you that everything you wrote in this post, only demonstrates your lack of skill in reading/using a 'scope.

What's truly SAD is that I now suspect that picowatt doesn't actually understand what that coupling represents.  Perhaps our little TK can explain it to him in the fullness of time. 

Quote from: picowatt on June 24, 2012, 03:28:23 AMIf it were not for the 'scope being DC coupled, I would be unable to state what the actual voltage being applied to the gate of Q1 is.  If you knew about AC/DC coupling, this would need no explanaton.  Sorry...

No need for him to apologise.  We all know that he's only got a very limited knowledge about really sophisticated instrumentation.  The required coupling is applied to each channel.  If it's not applied it defaults to DC.  But DC is NOT correct when the ACTUAL voltage being measured is AC.  Perhaps he'll read this SLOWLY.  And then perhaps the penny will drop.  One hopes so.  He's getting excessively tedious.

Regards,
Rosemary

added.  I missed this...

Quote from: picowatt on June 24, 2012, 03:28:23 AM
There is +12 volts being applied to the gate of Q1 in FIG 3.  This is fact, confirmed by LeCroy.

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.  12 VOLTS MEASURED DC.  Now.  WHAT DOES THAT MAKE IT IF IT SHOULD BE AC?  Then ADD to that the 'off set' bias.  And THERE YOU HAVE IT!  Hopefully...  LOL.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 24, 2012, 03:29:51 AM
And now it seems that I've erred.  LOL.  Picowatt NEVER claimed that there's anything wrong with our MOSFET.  He's talking about something else.  How curious?
  I distinctly recall that one of the options that he rather PONDEROUSLY pretended - was that our Q1 had blown open or blown closed - or something?  Perhaps I did, indeed, ENTIRELY misunderstand him.  Who knows?

Regards again
Rosemary

Once again, you do not know what you are talking about.  TK and I were discussing a new coil driver of Groudloop's design that TK is building/working on.

And yes, THERE IS somethng wrong with Q1 in the tests depicted by FIG 3 and FIG 7 in YOUR first paper.

During the portion of the cycle wherein the FG output is a positive voltage, +12 volts is indicated as gate drive to Q1, which should turn Q1 fully on.  The CSR trace does not indicate the current flow one would expect if Q1 is turned on.

So, Q1 is either defective or is not connected as per the schematic provided in that paper.  There can be no other explanation.

Plain and simple.

ADDED:  And yes, you have indeed erred...