another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[MileHigh]

Rosemary:

MileHigh - what amuses me most is that you really believe this.  For some reason you seem somewhat 'piqued' that we reference that CSR in the position where it really, really is.  There are 7 of us collaborators.  That's an awful lot of us must be heavily committed to publicly and fraudulently misrepresenting the fact.  7 criminals who stand accused by you MileHigh?  With your conscience entirely untrammeled by concerns related to the effects of what may constitute 'slander'?  Judged 'guilty' notwithstanding the evidence to the contrary?  Because you 'prefer' to believe this?  I'm not sure who should be 'smitten' with a sense of shame - except that it most certainly is not ME nor any of my collaborators.  And in the light of your rather reckless indulgence in traducement - I doubt that can presume to occupy any moral high ground at all.  With or without respect. Golly.

We have looked at your clip and the function generator 'negative' terminal is connected to the battery ground.  In your papers you show the function generator 'negative' terminal connected before the current sensing resistor.

I don't care if it is an outright lie intentionally made by you or if you mistakenly thought that you were making a 'benign' change that would make the paper look better, or if it was simply an oversight - the bottom line is that there is a huge mistake in the circuit diagrams shown in the papers and this is simply unacceptable.

Nor am I going to try to 'prove' to you that current can flow through the function generator.  If you don't understand this then just accept it as being true or look it up and educate yourself.

This 'Rosie Posie game' where you whine and say "I'm clueless so as far as I am concerned things that you tell me that I don't understand and I don't like are untrue until proven otherwise" is getting really tedious.

All of your data is worthless junk because you are not looking at the true battery current because you and your team mistakenly put the function generator 'negative' probe where you all thought it was supposed to go.  Not a single one of you was aware that this mistake would corrupt all of your data and as a result your papers are junk.

MileHigh

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rosemary:

We have looked at your clip and the function generator 'negative' terminal is connected to the battery ground.  In your papers you show the function generator 'negative' terminal connected before the current sensing resistor.

I don't care if it is an outright lie intentionally made by you or if you mistakenly thought that you were making a 'benign' change that would make the paper look better, or if it was simply an oversight - the bottom line is that there is a huge mistake in the circuit diagrams shown in the papers and this is simply unacceptable.

Nor am I going to try to 'prove' to you that current can flow through the function generator.  If you don't understand this then just accept it as being true or look it up and educate yourself.

This 'Rosie Posie game' where you whine and say "I'm clueless so as far as I am concerned things that you tell me that I don't understand and I don't like are untrue until proven otherwise" is getting really tedious.

All of your data is worthless junk because you are not looking at the true battery current because you and your team mistakenly put the function generator 'negative' probe where you all thought it was supposed to go.  Not a single one of you was aware that this mistake would corrupt all of your data and as a result your papers are junk.

MileHigh

MilesStratospheric

Here we have another example of your impeccable reasoning.  Essentially you're claiming that you really don't care about the facts.  You prefer to think what you think and therefore as far as you are concerned you're 'right'.  In point of fact - YET AGAIN - we typically apply the probe to Q1 and its terminal to Q2.  It could NOT be positioned further from the shunt within the confines of that circuit apparatus - short of rebuilding that entire circuit.

Rosie Posie
   

Added
In any event.  Far be it from me to try and convince someone who's so entirely reasonable and so free from any possible accusations of slander.  It's the fall back technique of our trolls who give themselves unlimited license in their 'disclaiming' exercises. 

[picowatt]

Rosemary,

I admit I am unfamiliar with the Lecroy Wavejet 300 series.  That is why I downloaded the user manual to assist in my analysis.

In FIG. 3/Test 1, channel 3 is the signal to the gate, correct?  The little line under the number 3 to the left of the screen indicates the "zero" line or "zero" position of the trace.  Any displayed signal that is above that line is a positive voltage.  Any signal displayed below that line is a negative voltage.

During the period when the function generator output is positive, the scope indicates that the signal during that period is just a bit over one major division above the zero line  The settings at the bottom of the screen indicate that channel 3 is set to indicate 10 volts per division.  Hence, during the period of the cycle when the generator output is positive, it is applying approx. +12 volts to the gate of Q1, which should turn it on.

During that same portion of the cycle however, the channel 1 trace for the CSR indicates approx. zero volts at the CSR, as the trace is right at the zero line as indicated by the little line under the number 1 to the left of the screen.  The zero voltage at the CSR means zero current is flowing during that time period which means Q1 is not turning on.   So, the positive voltage at channel 3 is saying that Q1 ishould be turned on, but the channe 1 trace is saying Q1 is, for some reason, not turning on. 

In FIG. 5/Test 2, during that same period when the function generator is positive, channel 3 indicates that approx. +8 volts is being applied to the gate of Q1 which again should turn Q1 on.  This time, however, the channel 1 trace indicates +.5 volts at the CSR during this period.  The +.5 volts tells us 2 amps are flowing through Q1 and, therefore, that Q1 is indeed turned on.

In all scope captures I have seen on and prior to 2-22-11 from this circuit, the performance is as indicated by FIG5/Test3.  That is, when the function generator output is positive, Q1 turns on and current flow is indicated by channel 1.

In all scope captures I have seen from after 2-22-11, when the function generator output is positive, no current flow is indicated by channel 1.

Although it remains possible that I am reading the scope wrong, I am using the same LeCroy operating info in all reads of the captures and all captures prior to 2-22-11 indicate that Q1 is operating correctly.  Conversely, using that same scope reading methodology, all captures after I have seen from after 2-22-11 indicate Q1 never turns on, even though the scope channel 3 is saying it should.

Regarding the Q2 bias current.

When the function generator output is a negative voltage, this negative voltage is applied to both the gate of Q1 and the source of Q2.  The negative voltage at the gate of Q1 does nothing with regard to Q1, except keep Q1 turned off.

However, that same negative voltage applied to the source of Q2 biases Q2 on.  The term "bias" is used as Q2 is not fully turned on but rather is turned on only slightly.  This is typical of most "linear" amplifiers and in this mode Q2 is not being used as a switch but rather as an amplifier.  The amount of bias current flowing during this period is determined by the function generator's open circuit voltage, its internal 50 ohm resistor, and the turn on voltage characteristics of Q2.  If the FG's offset control was rotated fully negative, the FG is capable of approx -14 volts at its output.  At that open circuit voltage, with the FG's internal 50 ohm impedance, one would predict/expect the IRFPG50 to flow approx. 200ma of current.  That 200ma is then the amount of DC current that is flowing from the Bat thru Rload, Q2, and the FG during the cycle period when the FG output is a negative voltage. 

The estimated 200ma is only an estimate.  Possibly the FG was not at -14 volts, but something much higher like -3 volts which would greatly reduce the bias current.  I am using the -14 as I read in your paper that the offset control was turned to it fully negative position (at least in one test).  However, it is also possible that Q2 was above 25C, which would significantly increase the bias current.  As well, MOSFET threshold voltage differs between devices of the the same part number.  With all these variables and no measurement made of the bias current, the 200ma is only an estimate and is very likely within +/- 50ma of the actual bias current for the FG at full negative offset.

I wish the exact bias current was known for a more accurate replication.  This can be determined if we knew the FG open circuit voltage, that is, its negative voltage while disconnected from the circuit.  When reconnected, the channel three trace would then give us the closed or in circuit voltage.  Using the difference between the open circuit and in circuit voltage and the Rgen of 50 ohms, the bias current could be determined fairly accurately.

As to evidence of bias current in the scope shots, that is what the discussion regarding the connection point of the FG lead's ground clip is about.  If it was connected to the BAT- instead of the CSR, the bias current would not be displayed on the scope traces.

However, even if the FG signal common is connected to the CSR, it would be difficult to see 200ma. on the CSR trace as that would amount to +50 millivolts at the CSR and the scope is set to 1 volt per division. 

Please feel free to print this response and show it to somebody. 

PW

 

[TinselKoala]

Go ahead, MH.... ask her for contact information for any of the seven "collaborators". Ask her who is preventing her from testing and why she "has no say" in the matter.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

In FIG. 3/Test 1, channel 3 is the signal to the gate, correct?  The little line under the number 3 to the left of the screen indicates the "zero" line or "zero" position of the trace.  Any displayed signal that is above that line is a positive voltage.  Any signal displayed below that line is a negative voltage.

During the period when the function generator output is positive, the scope indicates that the signal during that period is just a bit over one major division above the zero line  The settings at the bottom of the screen indicate that channel 3 is set to indicate 10 volts per division.  Hence, during the period of the cycle when the generator output is positive, it is applying approx. +12 volts to the gate of Q1, which should turn it on.

During that same portion of the cycle however, the channel 1 trace for the CSR indicates approx. zero volts at the CSR, as the trace is right at the zero line as indicated by the little line under the number 1 to the left of the screen.  The zero voltage at the CSR means zero current is flowing during that time period which means Q1 is not turning on.   So, the positive voltage at channel 3 is saying that Q1 ishould be turned on, but the channe 1 trace is saying Q1 is, for some reason, not turning on. 

In FIG. 5/Test 2, during that same period when the function generator is positive, channel 3 indicates that approx. +8 volts is being applied to the gate of Q1 which again should turn Q1 on.  This time, however, the channel 1 trace indicates +.5 volts at the CSR during this period.  The +.5 volts tells us 2 amps are flowing through Q1 and, therefore, that Q1 is indeed turned on.

In all scope captures I have seen on and prior to 2-22-11 from this circuit, the performance is as indicated by FIG5/Test3.  That is, when the function generator output is positive, Q1 turns on and current flow is indicated by channel 1.

In all scope captures I have seen from after 2-22-11, when the function generator output is positive, no current flow is indicated by channel 1.

Although it remains possible that I am reading the scope wrong, I am using the same LeCroy operating info in all reads of the captures and all captures prior to 2-22-11 indicate that Q1 is operating correctly.  Conversely, using that same scope reading methodology, all captures after I have seen from after 2-22-11 indicate Q1 never turns on, even though the scope channel 3 is saying it should.

Picowatt

Look again at those screen shots.  You'll see channels 1 through 4 - on the base line display.  It indicates that the display is DC.  Then look at the offset values that follow.  It indicates the PEAK TO PEAK VOLTAGES with their 'bias'.  That's the number to apply to the Channel 3 display as the Channel 3 display is actually and obviously AC.

Regards,
Rosemary