Testing the TK Tar Baby

[MileHigh]

Poynt:

I second that motion for just decoupling a single battery.  Sounds like a plan.

TK:

You have a 700,000 uF cap.  So if we assume 200 mA drain on that cap, the delta-v is in one second is:

delta-v = 0.2/(700,000x10^-6) = 0.28 volts.  I didn't have a handle on the current drain before so I was worried.  This is actually pretty good news.

For example, if you charge the cap to 14.6 volts and run the setup until the cap discharges to 10.6 volts your run time should be about 14 seconds.  That's enough time to get it going, then show the delicious oscillations on your scope with the apparent negative power, and then move the camera over to a multimeter showing the cap slowly draining in voltage.

For those new to the thread, we are talking about substituting one of the Tar Baby batteries for a big capacitor.  The capacitor will decrease in voltage over time proving that the Tar Baby NERD replication is not "COP infinity," even though the Tar Baby acts the same way as the NERD circuit and has the same schematic and uses the same components.

If you crunch the numbers you can also deduce the power consumption of the Tar Baby circuit, which means that the NERD circuit would have a comparable power consumption.  Zipons be damned!

MileHigh

[poynt99]

I can do the most negative in the stack without the need for a diff probe, right?

If you can place both scope probe gnd leads directly on the battery's neg terminal, yes. That means no negative battery lead wire between the battery terminal and the scope gnd leads.

[MileHigh]

TK:

I think that there will be minimal disturbance with decoupling just one battery, to be confirmed with the scope display.

When you think about it, the substitution of just one battery for a capacitor is also a strategy for minimal disturbance of the setup.  It's decoupled by definition and the "current measurement" is indicated by the change in voltage on the cap.

"Vee equals one-over-cee integral aye dee-tee."  "Aye equals cee dee-vee dee-tee."

Plus the presentation in the clip will have impact.  Everybody can relate to a sinking voltage reading on a capacitor.  Capacitor voltage sinking into the Depths of Doom like the Titanic dragging the NERD circuit down, down, down to it's doom!  Muh-ha-ha-ha-haaaaa!

I know that you stated that you did it before but somehow I missed it.

MileHigh

[picowatt]

As I suggested TK, I recommend keeping it simple, practical, and easy with as little disruption to the circuit as possible.

Alter ONE battery only (by adding filtering across it if necessary) and do the measurements using that ONE battery. No changes to the wiring necessary, and the oscillations will be unchanged.

.99,

I see where your going here.

Absent the diff probe, how about:

A.  Place caps across first battery above ground.  Reduce inductance of the BATT- wire to the ciruit board with addition of parallel runs or braid if needed, measure first battery V+ for battery AVG.

B  Connect a 10K resistor at the boards BATT+ connection.  Place caps between board/measurement ground and free end of 10K.  Use the 10K/cap juction as battery AVG.


As TK said, bypassing the entire battery string and adding additional wire if needed to maintain osc would prove additional points as well and may be a nice demo for others using switchers and osc's. 

I for one am already convinced your analysis is correct.

In fact, if TK's circuit demonstrates a neg mean pwr (which I believe it has), and his circuit is proven to not be COP>1, or even claimed as not being COP>1 by others,  the point has already been made that such a measurement cannot by itself be relied upon as an indication of COP>1, overunity, non-conventional operation or whatever others are calling it.

PW   

[picowatt]

TK,

I would go back to whatever operating conditions gave you the previous neg numbers (bias supply, Ibias, etc).

Do a quick test to see how difficult it will be to maintain similar osc waveforms with the entire string of batteries decoupled and then decide the best route to take.

PW