Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Again, it should be noted that at the present time all we are seeing is an effect. Thus far no one has been able to prove that the measured results are correct. However, I've proved that they are not.

.99

Golly.  Did I miss something here?  Rather thought that our kitty had everything wrapped and ready to go?  Indeed I'm keen to see similar results and if these can be realised on a dissimilar resistor - then so much the better.  Pointy Point, do your thing.  But I also think you've been obsessing here.  Perhaps a short recovery break?  It may be as well to follow in the footsteps of our immortal MH.  Personally I'm hoping it will give you the same benefit that the Signal Path Compensation Run does for our DSO.  Gets the analogue system in synch with it's ground reference.

[Hoppy]

Correct Hoppy. However, if you examine the wave forms from the actual tests (mine and Glen's) I posted, you'll notice that current is present in the shunt at the instant the Drain voltage peaks. In fact it's there for the entire duration of that peak. This amounts to a significant skew in the power calculation when averaged over one cycle.

The last sim was a trial to see if I can reproduce this effect. It was only a first run and needs more work. I also forgot to change my reference point in the measurement.

.99

The traces look about right to me. As I see it, the current is lagging the voltage and the inductive discharge at the point of peak drain voltage results in a continuous current flow through the shunt resistor. An appropriate power factor correction therefore needs to be applied to correct the 'skew' to obtain real power dissipation.

Hoppy

[poynt99]

Golly.  Did I miss something here?  Rather thought that our kitty had everything wrapped and ready to go?

I'm willing to concede this if/when I see proof Rose. Did I miss something? So far I have seen no proof.

The "proof" is: prove that the resistor really is dissipating the 100+W of real power as being computed from Glen's data in test #5.

Waiting patiently... 

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I'm willing to concede this if/when I see proof Rose. Did I miss something? So far I have seen no proof.

The "proof" is: prove that the resistor really is dissipating the 100+W of real power as being computed from Glen's data in test #5.

Waiting patiently... 

.99

Quite right.  This is exactly the puzzle that we need to resolve.  But there are other ways to determine power dissipated.   And no-one has problems on determining the power delivered. 

[poynt99]

The traces look about right to me. As I see it, the current is lagging the voltage and the inductive discharge at the point of peak drain voltage results in a continuous current flow through the shunt resistor. An appropriate power factor correction therefore needs to be applied to correct the 'skew' to obtain real power dissipation.

Hoppy

Hoppy,

I do not believe this is correct, for 2 reasons:

1) SPICE does not require that any PFC be done to obtain the correct results. Simply measuring the voltage across the load resistor and multiplying it by the current in the shunt produces the correct result.

2) REAL power is determined by the exact method we are using, which is measuring the instantaneous voltage across the load resistor, and current through the shunt. The multiplication of the two values and averaging is performed in Excel and produces the correct results. PFC is automatic if you will, since it is purely dependent on the phase between the two.

W (real power)/VA (apparent power) = PF

We are already measuring REAL power directly. PFC needs to be applied only if we are measuring apparent power.

.99