Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[TinselKoala]

It's the maximum temperature that you need to limit.  Typically, resistors top out at 125C heated temperature.

Duh, of course. Brain is numb. So extrapolating from my own data with the load cell set up as for the calibration, I could not even get to the 100 Watt level... I think I'll attain 125 C at around 75-80 Watts or so. Hmm.

(Actually I just did an informal run at 60 Watts and the oil did get to 125 C but with some thermal insulation and 350 mL of water in an outer beaker surrounding the oil beaker. "The water wasn't actually boiling but there were small bubbles" and "steam was evident " blah blah. See photo below. Elapsed time 2 hours.)

Thanks for pointing this out. I may have to start all over, with better cooling or different load elements, if I'm going to be making some big heat.

But at least I'll be able to do Q2 oscillation modes and short Q1 duty cycles with 4 batteries, maybe.

[MarkE]

Duh, of course. Brain is numb. So extrapolating from my own data with the load cell set up as for the calibration, I could not even get to the 100 Watt level... I think I'll attain 125 C at around 75-80 Watts or so. Hmm.

Thanks for pointing this out. I may have to start all over, with better cooling or different load elements, if I'm going to be making some big heat.

But at least I'll be able to do Q2 oscillation modes and short Q1 duty cycles with 4 batteries, maybe.

The basic scheme is obviously limited to what kind of heat removal scheme that you've got.  A big heater if powered going to well:  generate a lot of heat!  I don't think that you want to operate above 200C no matter what, just as a matter of safety.  In rough numbers a 6 high lead acid battery stack is going to put out ~75.6 - ~78V.  ~12 Ohms and we are talking 450W on the low end, or as Ms. Ainslie likes to say:  "copious heat".  Besides with just one Q1, 450W in the load means about 40W in Q1 which is going to require a very healthy heat sink.  So, I think that limiting the Q1 duty cycles is the way to go. 

I would do the tests with Q2 oscillations first on the existing set-up at a full battery stack.  Then I would run Q1 close to the system power dissipation limit again with a full battery stack and whatever duty cycle is required to stay below the dissipation limit.  For those tests, I would not let the function generator go below 0V.  Then I would adjust the function generator swing to drive Q1 at the short duty cycle and the Q2 oscillations at the long duty cycle.  I think that wraps a full circle around the ideas:

Efficiency and heat production with Q2 oscillations only.
Efficiency and heat production with Q1 only limited.
Efficiency and heat production with Q1 and Q2.

[TinselKoala]

Thanks for the suggestions, that sounds like a pretty good plan to me.

Meanwhile, the astounding rationalizations continue. We have the Great Scientist seeing a wire connected to the battery stack, seeing and acknowledging current measured in that wire.... and yet she still manages to deny that the wire is hooked up to anything. She still believes that the battery is disconnected during the Q2 oscillations! She still believes that the high amplitudes of her spurious "current" traces are actually indicating high currents! All of this in spite of her own demonstrations, the patient explanations and illustrations from Poynt99, and my own videos which break the issue down into its elemental components. This is truly a spectacle. Generally when people are shown to be as full of nonsense as Ainslie, they go slinking off back to their hovels and aren't heard from for a while. Ainslie however has no shame at all, no apparent inkling of the laughingstock she has made, and continues to make, of herself. She defends her ignorance with vengeance, literally.

Yet of course.... she has no explanation for what happens when the battery is actually disconnected, or the SOURCE of the Q2 is actually disconnected, or the FG/Bias supply is actually disconnected from the rest of the circuit. Even though my videos cover these points in excruciating detail, and pitched at a level so basic that a bright ten-year-old child (who didn't already know everything) would grasp the issues and concepts immediately.

Nor will she-- or anyone-- deal with the issues I have raised regarding the bogus Figure 8 scopeshot. Milliseconds, or Microseconds, Ainslie? It _actually_ makes a huge difference. What was the duty cycle, what was the open-circuit voltage setting of the FG? We will never find out the answers to these basic and important questions from the Great Scientist Rosemary Ainslie .... we will have to determine the answers for ourselves.

[MarkE]

Thanks for the suggestions, that sounds like a pretty good plan to me.

Meanwhile, the astounding rationalizations continue. We have the Great Scientist seeing a wire connected to the battery stack, seeing and acknowledging current measured in that wire.... and yet she still manages to deny that the wire is hooked up to anything. She still believes that the battery is disconnected during the Q2 oscillations! She still believes that the high amplitudes of her spurious "current" traces are actually indicating high currents! All of this in spite of her own demonstrations, the patient explanations and illustrations from Poynt99, and my own videos which break the issue down into its elemental components. This is truly a spectacle. Generally when people are shown to be as full of nonsense as Ainslie, they go slinking off back to their hovels and aren't heard from for a while. Ainslie however has no shame at all, no apparent inkling of the laughingstock she has made, and continues to make, of herself. She defends her ignorance with vengeance, literally.

Yet of course.... she has no explanation for what happens when the battery is actually disconnected, or the SOURCE of the Q2 is actually disconnected, or the FG/Bias supply is actually disconnected from the rest of the circuit. Even though my videos cover these points in excruciating detail, and pitched at a level so basic that a bright ten-year-old child (who didn't already know everything) would grasp the issues and concepts immediately.

Nor will she-- or anyone-- deal with the issues I have raised regarding the bogus Figure 8 scopeshot. Milliseconds, or Microseconds, Ainslie? It _actually_ makes a huge difference. What was the duty cycle, what was the open-circuit voltage setting of the FG? We will never find out the answers to these basic and important questions from the Great Scientist Rosemary Ainslie .... we will have to determine the answers for ourselves.

You are welcome.  Little if anything rational has come from Ms. Ainslie in recent weeks.  Even when she is carefully spoon fed she either fails to comprehend, or chooses to ignore what is placed directly in front of her, or that she has herself demonstrated.  As someone noted yesterday, that horse has been beaten to death. 

I see value in what you are doing as it demonstrates good process, including dealing with the inconveniences and realities of real experiments.  I really like the Arduino driven camera.  It inspired me to check if my still camera has a a remote shutter capability.  Unfortunately, it does not. 

[TinselKoala]

Not even a facility for screwing a manual cable release into the shutter button? A small solenoid could be used to drive that arrangement.

The old Canon Xti. I bought it used about four years ago, it already had a lot of shutter actuations .... but then I've put nearly a thousand frames on it just in the past two days, documenting twelve one-hour experimental runs and some extras. I  managed to find some high-capacity batteries for it... on sale as discontinued items, at Radio Shack of all places. It gets a lot of use and is reliable and rugged. The only problem I've ever had with it was a slightly flaky main switch, which was fixed by some careful application of electro contact cleaner/lube.