Exploring the Inductive Resistor Heater

[TinselKoala]

TK:

It looks like the domain name servers don't like Rosemary's baby anymore.  Could it be temporary or something else???  Knocked off the air by a Zipon-Neutron bomb?

Gmeast:

When you speak to PW you are graced with the presence of Zen Master electronics and measurement guru.  Harvey is not in the same league as PW at all.  Rosie Posie can't qualify anyone because she has no knowledge base to work with.

I have only skimmed at some recent postings on this thread and I can tell you that you should take every single word that PW says very very seriously.

MileHigh

Interesting. I also see an error now when I try to go there via my proxy server. It has happened in the last couple of hours, whatever it is. Maybe she finally got the letter from Bryan Little's lawyers.

You do know that she took down from YouTube the famous "demo" video-of-lies, right? 

[gmeast]

Greg,

I have only been trying to understand and discuss your experiments and methodologies.  Why all the attitude?  You seem to think you know what I think, great, where did you get that from?  I am not Harvey, I don't speak French, I am not "anti-OU" nor am I refusing to accept anything.  But, that is another matter.  In any event, is anyone that questions your methods or attempts to understand them subject to such behavior?  If so, good luck with that.  It will surely not assist you in gaining further acceptance.  I, however, am doing my best to ignore it...
 

I have looked over your slides for some time.  I believe I follow and can agree with your methods up to a certain point.

From your own measurements, it looks like you are saying that to produce the same deltaT as the BH, it takes 3.16watts from the DC supply.  Using the rheostat to produce the same Vdrop at SH3 requires 3.09watts.  Although I think there may be an error with regard to how you are determining the contribution of of the gate drive to the circuit, using your figure of .117watts, then apparently, from your numbers, the BH is using 3.2 watts to produce an output of 3.15 watts.  Even that just under OU efficiency is, it itself, amazing, but as I said, I believe you need to study the contribution of the gate driver a bit further.

When you disconnect the drain Vsupply, the capacitances in the FET increase to their extreme maximums, i.e., the driver sees a maximum capacitive loading.  When you reapply drain voltage, the FET capacitances reduce substantially.  Merely comparing and using only the difference in driver power between those two conditions may not provide an accurate assessment of the driver's power contribution to the circuit overall.

But, where I am having the most difficulty accepting your results is when you use the time it takes the battery to discharge to 27.44V when loaded with the rheostat to determine total watt hours consumed.  This is where my concern regarding a battery's capacity varying with different load profiles comes into play.   If desulphation and pulse plating effects cause the battery to have an increased capacity when the load is pulsed above that capacity observed under a DC load, it would be improper to use the disharge curve as you do to determine watt hours.

To expect similar discharge curves from a battery under a given load for 8 hours and that same battery under that same given load for the same duration but with a desulphator circuit attached would be questionable at best.

Regarding the oscillations being different with a DC supply, have you attempted to produce the battery's equivalent circuit at the output of your supply?  That is, isolate the supply with an equivalent circuit that models the measured ESR, ESL and C of the battery?  That may allow you to produce the same oscillations using the DC supply and perform further investigations using just the supply.


PW   

Hi PW,


Read it again! There is NO Delta-T in either of the battery draw-downs. That's not in the data ... RL is not even hooked up during those draw-downs. Look ate the circuit diagrams.


FYI: I received a PM from a 12-year old that completely understands this, but had to explain it to her science teacher ... who finally 'got it'.


You are in error on the gate driver issue. I spent many hours testing this because of your insistence that it be included. It turns out to have a constant overhead whether it's driving the gate or not and therefore, for the sake of pure research, that overhead can be excluded just as the PWM's can. That's not even a point for discussion.


As far as everything else goes, as I said, "I'm done sharing here".


Regards,


Greg

[gmeast]

Interesting. I also see an error now when I try to go there via my proxy server. It has happened in the last couple of hours, whatever it is. Maybe she finally got the letter from Bryan Little's lawyers.

You do know that she took down from YouTube the famous "demo" video-of-lies, right?

Hi TK,


Thanks (I guess) for your input. Rosie's website thing is a mystery because I was just there, my access is unhindered, my permissions remain active ... so who knows.


I don't know any thing about any "Harvey", any measurement 'guru' or anyone else. In fact, I don't really care about any "demo" video-of-lies'. I'm not 'feeding' anyone's agenda but my own ... which is to share my research.


I can't take anything PW has said seriously because in our last exchange, it is clear he has yet to actually and carefully study the presentation.


Example: he somehow determined that there were Delta-T Fixture measurements as part of my draw-down data. The Delta-T Fixture is not even hooked up in those tests and the circuit diagram shows that.  As well I have shown that the gate driver has a constant overhead whether or not it is driving the gate and THAT overhead can be excluded from the performance calculations just as the PWM's can.


PW is not the final word, you are no the final word. I'm not so sure what any of you who are anti-Ainslie are actually up to.  All I know is that I started this thread to share my findings (WHICH IS WHAT THESE FORUMS ARE FOR!), NOT to have it be an announcement platform from where to launch something about Rosie's site having some technical problems.


DON'T HIJACK THIS THREAD. But it doesn't matter anyway, I'm done sharing here.


Regards,


Greg

[gmeast]

WHERE IN THE HELL ARE YOU HARTMAN? TAKE CARE OF THIS HIJACKING CRAP NOW! YOU ARE STILL PERMITTING THE SAME  NON-PRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR ON THE PART OF:


"THE SQUAD"

Let me moderate my own thread so I can delete obvious B.S.

Greg

[picowatt]

Hi PW,


Read it again! There is NO Delta-T in either of the battery draw-downs. That's not in the data ... RL is not even hooked up during those draw-downs. Look ate the circuit diagrams.


FYI: I received a PM from a 12-year old that completely understands this, but had to explain it to her science teacher ... who finally 'got it'.


You are in error on the gate driver issue. I spent many hours testing this because of your insistence that it be included. It turns out to have a constant overhead whether it's driving the gate or not and therefore, for the sake of pure research, that overhead can be excluded just as the PWM's can. That's not even a point for discussion.


As far as everything else goes, as I said, "I'm done sharing here".


Regards,


Greg

Greg,

I never said that the delta T's were used with regard to drawdown (except for the initial BH run).

Based on your numbers, up to the point where you do compare drawdowns, you demonstrate an efficiency of about 2.5% OU, or just under OU if your calculated driver contributions are added in.

This is determined by comparing the power required from the DC supply to produce same deltaT as the BH, which is used as "output power", to the power calculated from either the rheostat test or the measured SH3 voltage and the average Vbatt, which is used as "input power".

Am I correct so far?

The drawdown numbers from the rheostat test are then used to determine the time required for Vbatt to cross the BH run's end voltage, and the length of time at which that occurs is then used to calculate the watt hours consumed by the BH.

Is this correct?

PW