Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[TinselKoala]

Thanks for the support, Chet. Sometimes it feels like nobody cares.

[WilbyInebriated]

OK, if it will make you happy, my replication is "nearly exact" since I did not use the IRFPG50 Mosfet.  Obviously. Shame on me.

thanks. as i said before, a couple times i think, that's really the only thing i had issue with. nice that you tried 4 others though 
damn, it's like pulling teeth...

i meant the "jack of all trades" as a compliment tk... ie:polymath

"jack of all trades, master of none, though oft times better than master of one."
i thought you ran in erudite circles?  all that jumping must keep you in good shape?

edit: offering bets? after i twice said i agree with you (mostly) about the duty cycle? i have to again ask, are you mental? what's with your reading comprehension?

[poynt99]

Thanks for the support, Chet. Sometimes it feels like nobody cares.

TK I have a lot of respect for you and your methods.

My advice to you is to ignore folks like this. Sometimes their only aim is to entice you into battle. Usually it's not worth the time or effort.

Regards,
.99

[Groundloop]

@TinselKoala,

Rosemary Ainslie has joined the energetic forum.

Groundloop.

[ramset]

TK
The big man in the house
Rosemary said
TinselKoala - I viewed your Utube on our circuit. It was interesting but my first point is that the waveform on both the first and the second are nothing like our own. It did not go into resonance and it is nowhere near as complex as the one's we generate across the load. Something between your circuit and ours is out of synch.

I'm so sorry I can't get a picture of our waveform. I'll ask my co-author if he can perhaps organise something but suspect that it will take a little time. Michael John Nunnerley was bang on in pointing out that we were probably using a resonating frequency. Indeed we are. We sweep the duty cycle until it first goes into oscillation. That is the point that we usually get the best results. The waveform is not periodic - which makes for some tricky calculations of power - hence the need for that Fluke scopemeter and for those calorimetric values.

The other thing I did not see was the diode return to the positive teminal of the battery? I presume this was included? But I have a real problem in watching the battery voltage collapse on the second video. The load is light - and with the best will in the world, even with a 90% on duty cycle, I cannot understand how a fully charged 24 volt lead acid battery can deplete within the first 10 minutes of running. Were you using a flat battery? Certainly one would expect that it's capacity would enable a current flow of a resistor at 10 ohms (was it?) - therefore not more than 2.4 amps for longer than 10 or even twenty minutes even without any applied switching cycle. I also noticed at one stage that the battery seemed to lose it's voltage entirely - then go into a negative voltage value and then spring back to 24 volts. I can only say that such is really strange and in the years that I've been testing our circuit have never seen the like. I am reasonably certain that your battery was nearly flat or that its rated capacity may be somewhat questionable.

I am also concerned that you used a different mosfet. Not that it needs to be identical to the one that we used - but I am just not sure of the properties of the one that you used.

Regarding the 555 switch as opposed to the function's generator. There really should be no real difference between the two. However it is easier to adjust the 555 switch to enable that resonance which is both the object of the circuit and the main object of the thesis. Why you are not able to get the circuit into oscillation I do not know. Perhaps you must vary the frequency better. Incidentally I could not make out the frequency you applied on that demo.

The niceties regarding the actual published switch and the one that you built - here I cannot comment. What I do know is that if the switch is set at 5% on and the load shows 5% on then it cannot default to 90% on. It is that simple. I could not make out the positioning of the probes in relation to the load resistor. Again. Your questions seem earnest - but your references not so easily detected on that video.

In any event, the other problem I have is with the value of that spike which your referenced in the second video - I think it was. Our spike is generally far higher, upwards on 120v but is largely dependant on the applied duty cycle. In any event the amount of energy in the on cycle is always marginally more than the amount delivered by the spike. The value to the energy gain is in that this energy is repeatedly returned to the battery and to the load. This can be seen if you use 2 x 12 volt batteries as we did. If you run the test on the one battery and connect the second to the first with a common negative rail - then feed the diode to the positive of the second battery, you will see an immediate recharge to that second battery. That test was done to prove that the returning energy does, in fact recharge the energy source.

So it is that we justify the value of the energy delivered by the battery as the sum of the on and off cycles. The energy dissipated is the product of both cycles. Therefore is there a gain. And at this fast resonating frequency the gain is really substantial.

I do hope this addresses those points that you repeatedly refer to through these threads

Incidentally, TinselKoala - there's another point. We actually ran our tests with a control. The reason the published article and the paper deal with a test period of 10. something hours is because that is how long it takes the control battery to deplete its energy. For some reason, both in the quantum article and the paper I was specifically advised that any reference to battery duration was essentially irrelevant. Apparently battery draw down rates are subject to too many vagaries?

In any event, the actual draw down rate of the tested batteries is consistent with the energy measured to be delivered by the battery as the difference between the energy measured and calculated from the two cycles of each waveform being above and below zero. At the end of that test period the test batteries are more or less the same as at the start of the test period. The control is entirely flat.

We then recharged both battery sets (always used typical 12 volt car batteries) and swapped the control with the test. Variations of this was called for by BP to enable their accreditation of the tests. It was exhaustive and painfully repetitive.

CHET
PS
TK thank God you showed up ,or they wouldn't have had anything to talk about
You make us proud !!