Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[powercat]

@.99
You have turned it all round now, this thread was on its way out like all the others and now it's back and hotter than ever finally things might get clear and simple 
I take back any disparaging remarks I might have made in the past.
Exceptional work Sir, hats off to you.

[TheCell]

@Rosemary Ainslie : There are just so many other variations already on the internet.
Could you name a few of these variations? (Currently I am not questioning the effect.)

[Rosemary Ainslie]

@Rosemary Ainslie : There are just so many other variations already on the internet.
Could you name a few of these variations? (Currently I am not questioning the effect.)

@TheCell.

No actually.  I can't.  Or I can't be bothered.  I'm useless at doing internet searches.  And why aren't you questioning the effect?  I would have thought that you would need to.  We all do.

R

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Congratulations, Rosemary & Poynt99!

I know .99's critical skepticism frustrated you, but he only gives credence to your circuit and your theory, Rosemary. 

And for your part, .99: playing the villain is by definition the least popular of sports.  Kudos to you also, for sticking with it.

Thanks to both of you; this has been a most fascinating thread. You've provided me with an exciting first-foray into the field of circuits.   

Regards, Mark.

Aphasiac - I don't think you're entirely familiar with the level of 'attack' that was actively encouraged.  I've just spent a couple of hours going over some of this.  And it's been a salutary reminder.

But you're right.  There is a  tribute to be paid here and it's certainly with our Poynty Point.  If I could trust him better I'd be glad to leave all this to him - quite frankly. 

So Poynty?  How about it?  This thread is mostly read by you guys who do experimenting and who know considerably more about circuits than I'll ever be able to learn.  Perhaps I can leave all this to you and just post here as and when we get updates?  I'd be glad of this - if you can spare the time.  At the least you'll be able to answer questions.  The best I can do is refer them to our team. Just a real concern that Pickle is not let loose because he's utterly committed to denial.  And I'm not sure that I could actually rest easy under those circumstances.

I have nothing really to contribute except that I know my way around the power measurents and can help out if anyone wants a particular test done.  I would so like to concentrate my time on advancing this to our academics.  And then I also want to start preparing a paper in earnest.  Actually Poynty - I think we could make good use of your sims in that paper as well.  If you're really on board - it would be a great help.  Let me know. 

Kindest regards,
Rosie

[poynt99]

ok, i see your transformation - comfortable with that
(holding 'Q1' gate-disconnect assumption to be valid)

nice work! 

Thanks!

a couple questions right off the bat:

- asymemtrical behaviour of any oscillation across L2/Rl1 & CSR to be expected due to 'Q1' body diode
(eg. supporting ~6.25V peak -ve excursions on CSR)

   does the data suggest a major player in supporting the ~1.8V peak +ve excursions on CSR - eg. C12, Q2 Cdg, etc?

The positive peak excursion across the CSR resistor, is a result of the sharply cut off Drain voltage of Q2 when it turns ON. Prior to this when Q2 is OFF, the CSR's inductance is energized by the up-swinging Drain voltage (via the 'Q1' and Q2 capacitance), and so this sudden cut-off causes the CSR's inductance to reverse it's voltage across itself (Lenz's law), and this positive peak voltage is then "limited" by the forward-biased diode, which is why the positive peaks appear "squashed" and widened. This latter part happens when Q2 is ON, so the diode is forward-biased into a 0-volt potential, which is why it can limit the positive peak, even though it may only be a couple volts in amplitude.

- do you feel that there are any significant differences in the sim results between the Fig2 prog and the Fig 5 prog versions wrt net energy draw?

The sim results show no significant difference between the two circuit configurations in efficiency for power transferred to and dissipated in the load resistor.

Good questions np!

.99