Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

Performed a second DUT test to get more accurate TRAA (67ºC), and measured real average power as before. Performed CONTROL test to get the power required for a TRAA of 67ºC (corrected value).

Corrected real power input POS = 22.72W as per DC measurements.

CONTROL POS for equal TRAA of 67ºC = 13.5W

The circuit with these settings is losing 9.22W to the MOSFET, shunt, etc., and about 13.5W is being dissipated in the load resistor.

Also see a revised scope shot where the supply probe was placed right at the load resistor. This now shows a 20V bump vs. the 2V bump in the previous shot. The further the probe is place away from the supply (or battery), the larger this bump will appear.

Also, the shunt wave form is more "fuzzy" just like fuzzy's

.99

[MileHigh]

Hey Poynt,

Great data gathering again, one more time the numbers all add up in the known strange way.  I'm not holding my breath on your thermal equivalent power on the second run, it should come in at 20 watts less a smidgen.  (EDIT:  Ha! Ha!  Gag me with a spoon, I just saw your results and it was 20 watts less a lot - and I can see the error in my ways, I was forgetting about the big duty cycle change, I am such an idiot.  lol)

Therefore, you have valid POS measurements with the DSO and with the analog method that check out.  We have a pretty good understanding for why the MOSFET and load resistor DSO power measurements are strange.  And you mentioned that you are using a real thermocouple, which I would consider the best way to do the thermal profiling.  It stays in a fixed position on the load resistor and has almost no thermal capacitance itself.  Therefore you DC thermal profiling will be very accurate.

The funny MOSFET and load resistor DSO power measurements are strange, but they are consistent and they do add up properly.  Plus they are inside the "black box" and we don't need to obsess on them.  As I said before, we are really concerned with the electrial power put into the black box and the thermal power coming out of the black box.

Rosemary is mentioning things like the load resistor diameter, and I am sure others will throw a few toothpick spears at your results - but your armor is very thick, and all will bounce off of it.

You could in theory try all sorts of weird oscillation modes by playing with the 555 components and the gate input resistor - and you electrical in-thermal out measurements will all check out and show that there is in fact no excess energy no matter what you do.

This marks the beginning of the end for this project.  Perhaps the only "surprise" was that the inductive discharge does not in fact smash it's way through the closing switch of the MOSFET.  The propagation delays through the long length of wire in the load resistor result in the inductive discharge bouncing off an already closed MOSFET switch and creating a brief pulse of current in the reverse direction.  In a way even that doesn't matter, the basic facts remain the same - the inductive component in the load resistor generates an energy spike that dissipates, and the energy for that spike came from the battery.  The energy spike does not come from the vacuum, or the Dirac sea, or from zero point potential, or from compressed time potential, or from zipons, or from any other theory of the day - the energy spike got its energy from the battery.  For those that refuse to believe this, there are dozens of experiments that you could do that would all tell you the same thing; the energy in the inductive discharge comes from the battery.

Congratulations again!  You are the man of the hour!

On a different note, today I went to my very first (and probably last) ham radio flea market.  It was fun looking around, I had previously seen clips of these types of events on YouTube and thought that it would be fun to check it out.

I did a crazy impulse buy, something to put up on a wall one day perhaps.  I bought a beautiful analog voltage meter and a beautiful analog current meter.  They look they could be from the Forties through Sixties, hard to tell.  They are both about 5" x 5" x 2 1/2".  Please see the pics below.  The camera picks up all of the dirt, so they will have to be carefully cleaned.  They are just cool conversation pieces I suppose.  A little piece of Dr. Frankenstein's lab for a keepsake.

MileHigh

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Performed a second DUT test to get more accurate TRAA (67ºC), and measured real average power as before. Performed CONTROL test to get the power required for a TRAA of 67ºC (corrected value).

Corrected real power input POS = 22.72W as per DC measurements.

CONTROL POS for equal TRAA of 67ºC = 13.5W

The circuit with these settings is losing 9.22W to the MOSFET, shunt, etc., and about 13.5W is being dissipated in the load resistor.

Also see a revised scope shot where the supply probe was placed right at the load resistor. This now shows a 20V bump vs. the 2V bump in the previous shot. The further the probe is place away from the supply (or battery), the larger this bump will appear.

Also, the shunt wave form is more "fuzzy" just like fuzzy's

.99

Hi Poynty.  Some really good work here.  Well done.    

[Hoppy]

As MH says, this latest helping from Poynt99 marks the beginning of the end for this project, showing very clearly that the battery supplies all energy to the circuit and there is no overunity here. I doubt that the New Age team will accept this conclusion but that is to be expected.

Hoppy

[Rosemary Ainslie]

As MH says, this latest helping from Poynt99 marks the beginning of the end for this project, showing very clearly that the battery supplies all energy to the circuit and there is no overunity here. I doubt that the New Age team will accept this conclusion but that is to be expected.

Hoppy

I for one am entirely satisfied that Poynt's conclusions here are correct. 

Rosemary