Testing the TK Tar Baby

[poynt99]

99,

Thanks poynt.  I envy your sim work.  Gotta' get me some.  What software/version do you use?

I understand what you are saying regarding just decoupling one battery and then multiplying, and I know I will accept a measurement taken that way.  There is just something a bit more "magical" when one can demonstrate a totally different measurement taken at opposite ends of an ordinary wire.  A wire is not always just a wire.

PW

Orcad PSpice, v10.5. Thanks.

I just tried it again, but reduced the 60uF down to 10uf again, and the results are the same; +3.3W and -37.6W.

So it appears only a modest amount of filtering is required to show a significant change in the computed battery power.

Re. a wire not always being a wire? I can show you comments I made in this forum regarding the original COP>17 claim and the work I did on it back then (about 3 or 4 years) where I repeated the very same mantra. 

[poynt99]

Note also that this added filtering capacitor does NOT include additional hookup wire inductance, and is an ideal capacitor.

[poynt99]

I don't recall if you can enter a constant in the Tek scope to multiply against any channel, but I believe you can.

TK, if you want, try placing your DMM meter across V1-V2 and see if you get a sensible stable voltage reading. If you do, enter this value as a constant multiplier with the VCSR and you'll have an accurate PBat computation. You can try this with and without the capacitor filtering across the batteries. Pending little RF interference in the meter, this should give you a relatively solid and accurate VBat reading.

[TinselKoala]

TK,

I believe some time ago I suggested something like 220uF electro with smaller caps paralleled to decouple the electros internal L.  Dig out an old PC supply and grab a 100-470uF or whatever for LF, and then parallel a pretty blue and one of your .1 glass.  But yeah, beat me up, I did say one of each in your picture..

PW

Well, I thought we wanted to stay away from electrolytics. But sure, I have caps in that range and I don't even have to take anything apart to get to them.
There just might be something in this box I could use. The ones at top left are Mallorys and Spragues, mostly.

[picowatt]

@PW:
You said, "I think all the work you have put into this will have more value for readers here and elsewhere than as it just pertains to this circuit. "

Thanks... I hope that the main benefit will be in the information about the use of the oscilloscope to make actual measurements rather than pretty colored lines.

I've seen a lot of scope displays on these unconventional science (sic) forums that make it clear that scoposcopy is a lost art, and that people need numbers in boxes these days, that the basic operation of the scope is often misunderstood, and that artefacts are almost never considered.

The shots below are typical of the Ainslie shots from the "old days" and show nothing more than aliasing and poor triggering, yet they were presented as representative of overunity performance.

TK,

Regarding "scoposcopy" as you call it, I agree.  I think everyone should have to use an analog 'scope without cursors for a while before they jump to cursors and moreso, digital scopes.  Even with the DSO's, if that is a first scope, I'd recommend that the math and measurement functions not be used until the display grid on the screen, timebase, vertical sensitivity, AC-DC and triggering are fully understood and proficiency with visual measurements achieved.  But I do love cursors.

Of course I miss "valves", so what does that say?

PW