@PW: I think the total circuit DC resistance is more like 11.1 + 2.0 + 0.25 + leads, batts, clips... so I have been using 14R in my calcs which is still probably low. And I get a little over 2 amps shown on the DC portion of the trace.

IF 72 volts had been used as claimed, the current through the CVR during the Q1 ON time should have been 72/14 == over 5 amps _and at an 18 percent ON duty cycle would have overheated and blown the Q1 mosfet on its small heatsink_. It does not get anywhere near that level in the scopeshot and is much closer to the 3+ amps predicted by a 48 volt pack, and if a bit more resistance is added in... like for Q1 still being in the linear region due to the 5 volt gate drive..... the 2+ amp level shown is easily arrived at.

Quote from: picowatt on July 11, 2012, 02:45:59 PM
TK,

Why would you base your analysis on only 4 batteries?

She specifically states in her paper rearding Test 2 that SIX batteries were used.

Is there some evidence or statement that only 4 batteries were used or was this just assumed due to the indicated voltage during Q1 on time?


PW

EDIT: she also SPECIFICALLY STATES that the period was 684 ms... and it's not.

@PW: In addition, the drain signal behaves just slightly differently enough from the batt trace that one may distinguish them. Here is one shot, one of only a few that I have been able to find, that DOES unequivocally show the drain trace, in green. This is taken from the video demo where we can "see" where the probes are actually attached and the narrator tells us which is which, clearly stating that the green trace is the drain trace.

Note that your voltage drop calculation for the drain trace is borne out, since the batt trace is also shown.

What happened to the CRITICAL Trace 2 baseline indicator? Is this another "compression artefact"?

This image is from the CURRENT, supposedly CORRECTED version on the new forum right now.

This is the most selective compression artefact I have ever seen, to have removed THREE critical baseline markers, and nothing else, from TWO DIFFERENT SCOPESHOTS, in the versions posted on Ainslie's forum. The first instance we found of this egregious "error" was "corrected". But clearly... this highly selective compression artefact has found its way to remove YET ANOTHER CRITICAL INDICATOR on one of Ainslie's published data sets.

I am sickened by this obvious alteration and coverup of conflicting data by Ainslie and her minions.

WHERE IS THE CHANNEL 2 BASELINE INDICATOR? WHY IS IT THE ONLY THING ALTERED BY THIS "ARTEFACT OF COMPRESSION"

This is just too much. It is another clear example of her pseudoscientific misconduct.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 11, 2012, 03:01:42 PM
@PW: In addition, the drain signal behaves just slightly differently enough from the batt trace that one may distinguish them. Here is one shot, one of only a few that I have been able to find, that DOES unequivocally show the drain trace, in green. This is taken from the video demo where we can "see" where the probes are actually attached and the narrator tells us which is which, clearly stating that the green trace is the drain trace.

Note that your voltage drop calculation for the drain trace is borne out, since the batt trace is also shown.

TK,

Yes, I agree now.  The drain pull down time can be seen in the capture you posted and is absent in FIG5.  As well, I would suspect the Batt mean would read a bit higher in FIG5 if six batteries were used.

So, I suppose this only means that the stated "SIX" batteries for Test 2 is another error that needs correcting to just "FOUR" batteries.  Was this corrected in later "revisions" of the paper?

PW

@.99,

I usually refer to the "FG-" as the "FG signal common" or "FG ground".  I prefer "FG signal common".  I always refer to "FG+" as "FG output".

I believe FG+ and FG- is confusing her a bit.  I believe it makes it difficult for her to understand that the FG output is bipolar.

PW

ADDED for her benefit:

OK, "probe" (FG output) and "terminal" (FG signal common) it is.  I can live with that.  Don't like it, but can live with it.

The "terminal" as you call it, is always at 0 (zero) volts. 

The "probe" is either a positive voltage (greater than zero) or a negative voltage (less than zero).  A square wave output, for example, alternately makes the "probe" a positive voltage and then a negative voltage as the waveform swings plus and minus.

The "terminal", however, is always at zero volts.

"Full negative offset" makes the "probe" a negtive voltage as far negative as the FG is designed to output.

Again, the "terminal" is always ZERO volts.

The gate of Q2 is effectively always at zero volts.  To turn Q2 on, the FG probe applies a negative voltage to the source of Q2.

Making the source of an N-channel MOSFET negative with respect to its gate turns on a MOSFET.

For example, -5 volts applied to the source, with the gate held at ground, makes the gate +5volts with respect to the source.  The gate remains a zero volts, but zero volts is 5 volts more positive than the -5volts applied to the source.