Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie · May 14, 2011, 12:08:51 AM

Quote from: poynt99 on May 13, 2011, 11:59:32 PM
You are welcome to use any of my simulations.

Be aware however, that all my posted simulations have been based on the original "as-built" configuration as shown in the video demonstration.

.99

No Poynty. We need the corrected version. But we'll wait. There's no hurry. Enjoy your sunshine.

ADDED. And in any event I still have to post over those video shots and so forth. I should get my computer back on Monday or Tuesday at the latest.

Take care,
Kindest regards,
Rosie

poynt99 · May 14, 2011, 12:14:59 AM

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on May 14, 2011, 12:08:51 AM
No Poynty. We need the corrected version. But we'll wait. There's no hurry. Enjoy your sunshine.

Well, that brings us right back to getting commitment to a circuit diagram, which I have been striving for for some time now.

If the diagram IS per the one I posted above, then as I have already mentioned some time ago, I have NOT been able to get that circuit to oscillate.

So, if there are several folks working on this in the background (as you have indicated), and they have all had success with the simulation as per the new updated circuit, then you apparently don't need my work.

.99

Rosemary Ainslie · May 14, 2011, 12:26:19 AM

Quote from: poynt99 on May 14, 2011, 12:14:59 AM
Well, that brings us right back to getting commitment to a circuit diagram, which I have been striving for for some time now.

If the diagram IS per the one I posted above, then as I have already mentioned some time ago, I have NOT been able to get that circuit to oscillate.

So, if there are several folks working on this in the background (as you have indicated), and they have all had success with the simulation as per the new updated circuit, then you apparently don't need my work.

.99

Poynty. We have a problem of timing. I cannot view the schematic until I can see it. I can't see it clearly because the light is still bad and my eyes are rather weak. I should be able to view it CLEARLY by about 9.00 am. By then you'll be asleep. It's now 6.25 am or thereby. BUT. If you can't get it to oscillate and I do then we're overlooking something. And those who are working on this absolutely HAVE NOT informed me as to whether or not they've got an oscillation. If they do then it will be a 'replication' of a simulation. The first is significant. The second will be equally so. The first 5 should be conclusive. Right now I only have the one early indication that this is possible at all.

My own thoughts are this. Either the sim is possible. Or it's not. Either way it requires reference. Because CERTAINLY the experimental evidence is that - not only is it possible - but it is repeatedly so.

Hold fire there Poynty. I'm doing my best.
Kindest regards,
Rosie

added.
What I can't see are the junctions around the switch on that schematic. But I assure you that if you've configured it that it conforms to my 16 point list - then it's PERFECT.

Another point. DOES YOUR FG GROUND GO DIRECTLY TO THE GATE AT Q2? Nowhere else? That's what I'm trying to establish.

poynt99 · May 14, 2011, 12:42:53 AM

Rose,

The FG ground goes to the Q2 Gate, which is also connected to the Q1 Source.

.99

Rosemary Ainslie · May 14, 2011, 12:54:21 AM

Quote from: poynt99 on May 14, 2011, 12:42:53 AM
Rose,

The FG ground goes to the Q2 Gate, which is also connected to the Q1 Source.

.99

Yes. I've just checked. There is that link. But I think the negative current signal bypasses Q1's source entirely. What happens if you take the ground ONLY to Q2 gate? Maybe the sim is factoring in something that's actually not happening. As I see it - in my mind's eye - the negative signal is 'positive' relative to the new positioning of Q2's gate. Therefore it's just getting triggered in the usual way but reading the circuit's actual circuit DRAIN as the SOURCE. Maybe worth trying?

Regards,
Rosie
ADDED