Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

The dim lightbulb test has not been done by TK.  Or IF he's done this he has not shown us any numbers.  WHAT exactly do you wish us to do with that strange little test?  Replicate it?  LOL

Another pair of lies by Polly the blind deaf but not dumb Parrot. Of course I have done the dim lightbulb test, three times now, although the timelapse failed on the last one. Do you think I am hiding Tar Baby's failure to fail the Dim Bulb Test? Riiiiight. That's about as brilliant as Tar Baby's bulbs.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=youtube+tinselkoala+dim+bulb&form=MOZSBR&pc=MOZI


And yes, Polly... we DO expect you to replicate that strange little test.... and so does Stefan I believe, and so does everybody else, because that is the EASIEST and QUICKEST way to test your main claim WHICH HAS NEVER YET been tested by you: Do your batteries discharge while running your circuit and heating a load to 194 degrees C... or do they not? The DIM BULB test requires nothing more than some bulbs and some extra batteries and a camera. I think you have all of that... you even have a TRIPOD don't you.
Oh... and it requires that you operate your circuit, first, for some hours heating that load to near 200 degrees C beforehand, of course. You can do that, can't you, using 72 volts and the layout you have published? For some hours?

The test is right up your alley, because it DOES NOT DEPEND AT ALL on measurements other than your own eyeballs. Of course you will need to "tune" your circuit to get it performing properly. You will of course do this with a different but identical load, so that when you begin your running period at your desired tuning, you can use the first load... the cold one... so the experiment's load won't already be hot from the tuning stage. Fair is fair, right? I mean, you DON'T COUNT the tuning stage where the waveforms might be a lot different...... DO YOU?

Or perhaps .... YOU DO.

How do you eliminate the effect of the TUNING STAGE on the temperature of your load, anyway? I don't think anyone has worried about this yet, but since we are nearing the calorimetry tests of Tar Baby.... now might be a good time to bring it up.
The "effect" we are concerned with is supposed to happen in a steady-state system, but what we have seen from Polly Parrot is a bunch of different duty cycles and base frequencies, and clearly the circuit must be TUNED by the FG setting to produce the various modes of operation. Is it completely kosher to allow the load heat from the tuning process to be included in the heat data or the claims arising therefrom?

Somehow, I don't really think it is.

[TinselKoala]

Oh.... by the way.... Ainslie's load temperature measurements are coming from a thermocouple attached directly to the body of her water-heater element "load resistor", are they not? And most of the time, the load is simply out in the open, until it is hot, and then it is inserted into water. But the thermocouple remains attached to the large thermal mass of the water heater element, right? I mean, they have NEVER actually measured the temperature of the water itself. (Clearly, a WATER temperature of 104 South African degrees would be impossible to attain in an unpressurized container in Johannesburg or Cape Town... they are not yet below sea level, are they?)  And even at that precisely measured temperature, the water wasn't "actually boiling" when she first reported this experiment, as described in her blog post #117 and #118....it only becomes boiling after a year of mendacity and prevarication. It was releasing tiny bubbles. But not making the sound that a boiling teapot makes....

PERHAPS BECAUSE IT WASN'T BOILING at all, and the 104 degree reading is of the big metal load housing temperature, not the water temperature.

In Tar Baby's load cell, I have the resistors suspended by their leadin wires, completely submerged in 250 mL mineral oil, not touching the sides, with the thermometer well away from the resistors so that I am measuring the oil temperature.

But I will be very happy to take all of this apart and hang my load resistors in the air, and attach my thermocouple directly to the resistor body. What kinds of temperatures will I then be able to measure, I wonder. Does anyone doubt that I will be able to attain 200 degrees C this way, using the same conditions described in the Ainslie manuscript's "high heat" mode?

In the below shot we see "Texan degrees" displayed, that is degrees F. And this is NOT the temperature of some large metal mass, it is the temperature of the known quantity of known oil with known specific gravity and known specific heat, in which the resistors are submerged, and it is taken at a long enough time constant so that the resistors and the oil are most probably in thermal equilibrium... that is.... it may not be a super PRECISE measurement of the temperature due to the analog instrument and its calibration curve (which is also known, by the way) .... there may be a 3-5 percent error in the displayed figure...  but it is an ACCURATE representation of the quantity being measured: the ENERGY that has been delivered to and dissipated at the load.

[fuzzytomcat]

3. Polly Parrot THINKS that I did not "factor in" impedance. She is LYING YET AGAIN. Probably she cannot figure out how to download and open the SPREADSHEET where all my calculations and data are GIVEN for inspection by ANYONE, which I have linked several times. Where is Polly's comprehensive treatment of inductive reactance? Nowhere.

@ TK,

You've made a interesting point about the "SPREADSHEETS" not being offered for each of the oscilloscope images posted in Rosemary's blog site, here at OverUnity and in the two botched submittals for peer review. The only thing that Rosemary refers to is the "MATH" function used without any referral to 'HARD COPY" data sampling recording or it's availability for inspection.

I wonder also what kind of software was used for the 500K (500,000) recorded data sampling was used this rate used which seems high for the wave forms being produced. I all most always used the 10K (10,000) recording data sampling rate as most spreadsheet software can do the line totals, there was two test runs that I did that were at 100K (100,000) and there wasn't anyone in the project that had software for the line totals although Harvey came up with a method to evaluate the data in a general condensed form.

The attached oscilloscope screen shot example is one from Rosemary's two submittal papers to a accredited journal or magazine for possible peer review and publication. This is a odd one in my opinion with a 50s (50 second) per division setting and a 500K recordable data sampling rate including the math function being used, where is all the "hard copy" data dump information at for this one ? I haven seen one data dump file for a single oscilloscope screen shot ? The big question for me is what kind of spreadsheet software was used for 500,000 (500K) line totals Rosemary used almost exclusively ?

FTC

[TinselKoala]

That is indeed an odd one, as we have noted before.

There is the blue trace, indicating a positive 12 volts applied to the gate of mosfet Q1, for a duration of about SIXTEEN SECONDS during each "on" period.

Yet... there is absolutely NO current flow indicated on the CVR trace during that time.

Surely even a zipon-saturated IRFPG50 would be able to turn on, from a 12 volt solid gate signal, within sixteen seconds. I mean they are slow, but not _that_ slow.

What can possibly be the explanation for this scope shot? What is keeping the Q1 mosfet from turning on and passing current?

Could it be that something is disconnected somewhere, or a different circuit is being used? Or is there an even simpler explanation?

Polly Parrot refuses to tell us what her explanation is for this staggering "anomaly". However she has squawked a bit about how her "academics" have confirmed the data or some such rot. Therefore we are assured that the DATA is correct: somehow, a Q1 mosfet is being given a 12 volt gate signal and yet is not able to pass current.

This is not an error in the data. It is really REALLY happening: A mosfet is being given + 12 volts at its gate and is not passing current between drain and source. Her academics agree.

Why is this happening? Every n-channel mosfet I've ever seen behaves differently than this.

Every mosfet, that is.... that was actually working and wired correctly into its circuit.

EDIT TO ADD: Is there anyone, anywhere, that believes that the NERD load could be heated to nearly 200 degrees C, when running as shown in that scope shot? I certainly don't.

Go ahead, Polly: PROVE ME WRONG by showing
1) a delivery of +12 volts to the gate of Q1 and NOT turning it on, and 2) Heating a load substantially using scope traces like those shown in that shot above.

[Magluvin]

Tk

You are using mineral oil, not water?  From what I remember, water has quite a bit of resistance to taking on heat and getting rid of it compared to some other fluids.

Does the mineral oil heat up and dissipate at the same rate as water? Doing the same experiments side by side, 1 water and the other oil, would the temperatures of each rise and fall the same, in time?

Mags