Quote from: TinselKoala on June 29, 2012, 02:03:08 PM
Yep, it's clear enough to me, that is for sure. But we've seen how flailing and wallowing about muddies the waters and even the clearest explanations get twisted around in Ainslie-space. I'll just let you make your point your way, but I've done some FG output videos, as usual, that attempt to illustrate what you mean.

After all, one could simply hook the FG's "ground" lead (black output clip) to a big  honking cold water pipe, and then it should be perfectly clear to ANYONE , even YKW, that the potential at that point is always at Earth Ground.... you'd be hard pressed to change _that_ potential level by any means available to Ainslie. Yet, her circuit will operate just as it always does, even though it is now clearly impossible for the FG's negative output lead to change potential.

I have a 6 foot length of 1/2 inch copper pipe driven deep into the wet soil underneath my window air conditioner's overflow drip, with a 14-ga stranded lead-in wire to my workbench, that is my Earth system and RF ground when needed. You can bet your next three lunches that _that_ point isn't gonna let its potential be changed by no smoking FG, not even the Interstate.

TK,

AC condensation "drips" are really ideal for keeping a ground rod's surroundings moist.  Can't think of a better use for that "drip", unless you need some distilled water!

I have to rely on the plants being watered in the flowerbed my rods are buried in...

PW

Quote from: picowatt on June 29, 2012, 01:27:13 PM
TK,

It is truly a shame if her only replicator "over there" is a neophyte to electronics and being "lead by the blind" as it were regarding her skills in the art. 

It seems doubtful that a negative voltage is being applied to the NERD circuit using a 555 in his replication during the equivalent FG output LO period.  As you can attest to, a simple "standard" 555 circuit operating on a single supply cannot emulate the FG settings.  It is a bit more difficult.

That's right, a simple 555 can only output a signal at Pin 3 that is from a bit over its Zero volt supply to pin 1 (the negative rail) up to its positive supply voltage at Pin 8. In addition, the 555 can only source, at best, about 200 mA and can only dissipate about 0.6 Watts and has a maximum operating temperature of 70 C. They are certainly not applying a negative voltage with a 555 unless they are powering it with an external floating supply, not the main battery (unless they are using a charge pump as I have done). And with a max source capability of 200 mA under the best conditions the chip will get hot if they are using it to make the negative drive bias current.
However, the chip will get probably get hot even if they are only using it to make positive pulses for the gate HI mode, Q1 on, because of the oscillations and the impedance mismatch resulting in power being reflected back into the chip. This is common when using 555 to drive inductive loads, even the stray inductances in the NERD circuit. I have actually exploded 555 chips from not having a fast enough diode protection in there.
And I can't think of any simple way for the 555 timer, even on an external floating supply, to make both the negative bias current and the positive gate pulse as is needed for the NERD preferred mode of 18 percent gate HI. (In this context, clearly, an op-amp output stage is to be considered too complex to be considered.)
Regardless of the bias source used, whether it is a 555 or not, it must be capable of sourcing sufficient current to do the job. A 555 can barely do it -- max rated 200 mA -- , hence the heating and the need for heatsinks.

Quote

Possibly I missed somethng, has she ever presented a circuit showing the NERD circuit operating from a 555?

It just goes on and on...

PW

The first, COP>17 claimed circuit, used a 555 but wasn't required to have negative drive. I invite you to _please_ build up the 555 timer circuit given in the "Quantum magazine" article published on her forum as "paper 3" and let us know what kind of signal it puts out and what effect it has on the state of the mosfet it's driving.

She has reported that a friend of hers has used a "chip", probably a 555, in the present circuit and successfully got oscillations using only a 12 volt supply. But who knows what actually occurred. This was all around the time she was blowing transistors and freely reporting it. No schematic or detailed description of this was published as far as I can tell. For Tar Baby, the oscillations need a bit over 16 volts, I think.

Fuzzy may know of more, but as far as I know, I'm the only one who has _actually_ operated the full circuit on a 555 timer, making oscillations, using only the circuit's own battery supply.

In other words... no. She only claimed it, never showed it nor produced a schematic for it.

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on June 29, 2012, 08:24:05 AM

You cant even supply one (1) complete set of test data for a single claimed COP>INFINITY device test and haven't produced anything new in over a year just bloviating and baiting for fights wasting everyone's time.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 29, 2012, 08:34:39 AM
Not actually.  I both can and have. 

Rosie Pose

RIGHT Rosemary .... slime your way out of these two questions, I'm sure the "Open Source Community" would like to see answers without your constant bloviating 

1) Where is your publically available posted link with the downloadable complete set thats all in one place of the LeCroy scope shots and all the accompanying data dump spreadsheet files, including the device schematic and any photographs located "specifically" for Test #3 referenced in your "Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity on Switched Circuit Apparatus" ( ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF.pdf [attached file] ) that was used for your conclusions and claim(s) of the COP>INFINITY operation ??

2) Where is your publically available posted link with the downloadable complete set thats all in one place of the LeCroy scope shots and all the accompanying data dump spreadsheet files, including the device schematic and any photographs located for "ANY" test using a 555 timer replacing the functions generator that was used for your conclusions and claim(s) of the COP>INFINITY operation ??

FWIW, here again are the schematics for the 555 timer and the charge pump inverter I used for Tar Baby. Perhaps these schematics may be amusing to the current crop of builders.

TK,

There is an alternate arrangement using a 555 that can both bias Q2 on and turn on Q1 as the FG does.

It will still require a supply voltage more negative than the battery stack negative rail, but the additional supply can be referenced to the NERD battery negative rail.  Envision the following:

A "standard" 555 circuit is connected so that the 555 positive supply pin is connected to the batt negative in the NERD circuit.  A second supply that is -10 volts relative to the NERD battery negative is connected to the 555 negative supply pin.  This arrangement allows the 555 to swing between the NERD battery ground (when 555 out is HI) and -10 volts (when 555 out is LO) relative to the NERD battery ground.

Pin 3 of the 555 is used as the output, and a pair of PNP/NPN emitter followers are connected to the 555 pin 3 to act as a current buffer.  The collectors of the PNP/NPN are connected to the NERD battery ground and to the -10 volt supply operating the 555 (the bases of the PNP/NPN tied to pin 3).  This arrangement is just a standard current buffer to help the 555 stay cool (the current buffer may not be needed at lower Ibias settings, but is suggested) 

The emitters of the PNP/NPN buffer are tied together and connected ONLY to the source of Q2 via a series 50R resistor, or a lower value resistor as may be required (depending on the 555's negative supply voltage and desired Ibias).

You should be able to visualise this and easily see how when the 555 output is LO, a -10volts is applied to the 50R series resistor connected to the Q2 source causing Q2 to bias on and its Ibias to flow thru the 50R and 555 current buffer.  All in all, pretty standard stuff.

Now, to be able to turn Q1 on when the 555 output is high (which will actually be at a level slightly below the NERD negative battery rail), a bootstrap circuit can be utilized.

The negative terminal of a 10 uF electrolytic is connected to the emitters of the 555 buffer (the 555 buffer output).  The positive terminal of the 10uF is connected to the cathode of a diode.  The anode of that diode is connected to the NERD negative battery rail.  The gate of Q1 is connected to the 10uF/diode junction (only to the gate of Q1 is connected to the cap/diode junction, the connection between the source of Q2 and gate of Q1 have to be separated).

When the 555 output is a negative voltage (and Q2 biased on), the 10uF cap charges to approx -10volts.  When the 555 output is HI (that is switches to NERD ground potential and turns off Q2) the diode end of the 10uF cap rises to +10 volts (the +10 volts on the cap reverse biases the diode so it is turned off).  As there is only Q1 gate leakage current discharging the 10uF cap, it will hold its +10 volt level for some time, keeping Q1 turned fully on until the 555 again switches LO.  The 10uF need not be that large of value, and to speed up Q2 bias on time, can likely be reduced to well under 1uF and still keep Q1 turned on for the desired amount of time.  The 555 current buffer also helps provide the required current to charge the bootstrap cap and keep the Q2 bias on time reasonably fast.

Obviously, the -10 supply must be capable of supplying the required Q2 bias current.  A similar PNP/NPN buffer added to your 555 voltage inverter circuit circuit operated from the first battery in the string is a possible supply source.  Alternately, another 12 volt battery with its positive terminl connected to the NERD battery ground can be used for the 555 negative supply.   

Just food for thought.

PW