PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Devices > Inductive Kickback Circuits > The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit
2024-11-27, 22:49:47
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Author Topic: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit  (Read 477238 times)
Topic Options img
img  Groundloop
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #400 on: 2011-03-29, 04:14:31 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 336
Quote from: humbugger on 2011-03-29, 00:21:03
These are fairly good shunts for low frequency work or if the shunt value is several ohms resistance.  The inductance of 0.1uH is actually not very low at all, though.  It represents a reactance much larger than a typical 0.1 ~ 0.25 ohm shunt resistance value at 1.5 MHz.  Using a shunt like this (similar in inductance to Rosemary's reported value of 110nH (which I don't believe by the way...it is probably much larger)), will produce a voltage report which predominantly shows the di/dt rate of current change and NOT  the actual magnitude of the current.

Humbugger

Hum,

I did a mistake with the inductance value.
It is less than 20 nano Henry for a typical 100 milli Ohm resistor.
Sorry for the typing error.

There is also some high Wattage types with a flat line frequency response up to approx. 100 MHz.
See attached images.

GL.
   
img  humbugger
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #401 on: 2011-03-29, 06:10:54 »
Group: Guest
Yes, those are getting into the right ballpark now at 20nH, but still, at 1.5MHz, 20nH is 0.188 Ohms reactance...almost twice the value of the 0.1 Ohm resistance.  This would cause about a 60 degree phase shift and almost a 3x false reading of the magnitude.  Still HUGE errors if we are using the voltage information to feed a scope that is multiplying point by point samples with another varying voltage.  Even one or two degree errors caused by scope probe delays being uneven between probes are considered too large for accurate power calculations according to Tektronix App Notes.

Those other ones, that show an absolutely flatline out to 100MHz are at minimum 10 Ohms as graphed.  So a little high for shunt use.  I see you are understanding the basic problem and that's excellent.  It is extremely difficult to obtain accurate current information from even the best low-inductance shunt resistors in the sub-ohm range at RF frequencies.

There are three approaches I know of that work:

1)  A small ultra hi Q porcelain RF capacitor like the ATC 100B or 100C types (American Technical Ceramics) series capacitor can be used to exactly cancel (series resonate to a dead short) the inductance portion.  Sadly, this only works at one frequency so it is not a good general purpose solution and it's no good for waveforms that contain lots of harmonics (not pure single-frequency sine waves).  It also destroys the DC path, so is only good in AC-only measurements.

2)  A currrent probe costing thousands of dollars can be used instead of a shunt.  To give good honest results in a point-by-point sampled multiplying situation, however, this probe not only needs to be very wide band and DC accurate, but its phase delay would need to be precisely matched to whatever probe was being used to get the voltage samples.  These things are easy to say but extremely difficult to actually accomplish.

3)  Forget all about using data sample muiltiplication and use a low-pass filter on the shunt to get the net DC equivalent current.  The integrator nature of an RC filter will undo the differentiator nature of the shunt inductance. This only works when the other argument (voltage) is a steady DC voltage and you therefore needn't be concerned about power factor or phase shifts introduced between the voltage and current samples.

This is the technique I've been recommending for the Ainslie device and works well for measuring the input power to any black box whose power supply is a battery or fixed DC supply.

I do not know of any commercial wideband RF power meter that uses discrete sampling and multiplying techniques.  The most accurate ones seem to rely on either bolometer techniques (measuring the heating power) or by using a wideband 50 ohm load(which is standard in RF work and are readily available with flat (non-reactive) resistances out to 18GHz or more).  With a known resistive load, you just measure the voltage and find the power by e^2/R.  These approaches are no good, however, for measuring the input power to a device.

Humbugger
 
   
img  EMdevices
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #402 on: 2011-03-29, 06:42:54 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Quote from: feynman on 2011-03-27, 20:54:36
Can SPICE simulate this?

Meyl shows tesla longitudinal electricity transmission in 2003  (click link to see experimental demo)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4615804709108706714#

Didn't think so  :)


Feyman, believe it or not, spice can simulate that Meyl circuit (and Tesla's) just fine.  Thanks for posting that, I enjoyed the Meyl presentation video, similar to my experiments, but I'm using magnetic coupling not electric (or capacitive) like he is.

EM
   
img  humbugger
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #403 on: 2011-03-29, 07:01:27 »
Group: Guest
More Trouble Brewing...from Rosemary's Blog...ULTIMATUMS AND THREATS OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION!

"...Our Poynty is clearly not man enough to argue anything at all. I thought we were in the middle of a discussion. In fact, he was conducting a monologue and - it seems - will brook no argument. But what has now transpired is this. As you may or may not know - he owns a forum. Actually his sidekick Peter Evans owns the forum. But I think they're in partnership of sorts. Anyway. He's now given a mandate to 'Mookie' to rally contributions from anyone at all who has something nasty to say about me. Mookie assures all and sundry that nothing they contribute will be edited. Then, as if this is not enough - he has used his knowledge of my IP address to block my view. In effect, they've started their own little 'hate speech' campaign and prevented me from taking action against all that slander. I've reported this to ALL appropriate authorities. I'm not sure that he's allowed to do this legally. The question is can one undertake to publicly slander another person and then deny that person right to see that discussion. Private would be a different matter. But their's is a public forum.

I could wax eloquent about the morality of this and even the legality. But that's boring. The fact is that Poynty Point is, apparently something less of a man and something more of a big girl's blouse. When punches must be pulled that are that mean and far under the belt - then we're dealing here with something rather contemptible. For some reason they seem to think this is acceptable. Hopefully Peter and Poynty will learn otherwise. So. This is for Poynty and Peterae. Here's your choices guys. Refrain from any further mention of me or give me view of what your saying.

What sad little bullies they all are. But it reminds me how frantic they are to slur this work and my name along with it. Apparently Mookie is concerned that I wear pyjamas all day and do nothing but sit in a tiny little dusty room in front of my computer. LOL. Someone must please tell him that I have really substantial living quarters and rather an excess of space than otherwise. I play bridge. I garden. I consider myself a good cook. I read - EVERYTHING that I can. I have close family and close friends. And, indeed, I have close neighbours. So. A reasonably balanced life with a passionate interest in physics and a burning interest in promoting it's insights. What's wrong with that?

Then. Some good news for me - some REALLY bad news for Mookie et al. We're to do more demonstrations. But this time I'll hold back on details until they're in the bag. The promise is that the protocols will be evaluated prior to the test. So. All will be evaluated prior to that test and the demo will simply be the proof. That's a very good thing.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary"

I don't know what anyone else might have to say to all this dirty mudslinging childish name-calling self-important hoo ha but here's what I'll say and it's for the record so if she wants to sue me she can:

Rosemarie Ainslie is not qualified to discuss or make proper electronic circuit measurements  (fact)

Rosemary Ainslie is an argumentative attention-seeking and deluded individual full of arrogance and undue self-importance (opinion)

In private, Rosemary Ainslie picks her nose and eats it.  (clearly "hate speech") :P

Poynt:  When Rosemary sues you or threatens real legal action, let me know.  I'll give you my full name and address and you can forward it to her.  I would really like to be included as another defendant.

Humbugger

« Last Edit: 2011-03-29, 07:50:29 by humbugger »
   
img  humbugger
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #404 on: 2011-03-29, 08:53:01 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: Dumped on 2011-03-29, 08:26:22

What, pray tell, has Rosemary done to reap such
fallout?  Bruised some tender egos with her brilliant
intellect and skillful exposition?

Why would anyone's ego be bruised by another's brilliant intellect and skillful exposition?  Rosemary has drawn flak and endless criticism solely because her "brilliant intellect" is misused and confused, her expositions are so full of illogic and misdrawn conclusions and basic glaring obvious errors and her claims are unfounded, undemonstrated, outrageous, inconsistent and presented with such ferocious arrogance and pretense of expertise.

Her incorrect yet forceful assertions beg ridicule and derision only because all logical calm serious efforts to point out the errors many of us can see in her thinking and her test procedures and to have meaningful productive discussions of the realities of her circuit's operation with her have been thwarted by her time and time again.  She brings her ignorance to the forums with great fanfare and proclamations of scientific breakthroughs shattering centuries of learned knowledge and then cries foul if anyone points out the glaring errors therein.  This leaves little room left for genuine meaningful discussion or debate thus all that is left is to poke fun at how ridiculous it all is.

Humbugger
   
img  Groundloop
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #405 on: 2011-03-29, 19:42:53 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 336
Quote from: humbugger on 2011-03-29, 06:10:54
Yes, those are getting into the right ballpark now at 20nH, but still, at 1.5MHz, 20nH is 0.188 Ohms reactance...almost twice the value of the 0.1 Ohm resistance.  This would cause about a 60 degree phase shift and almost a 3x false reading of the magnitude.  Still HUGE errors if we are using the voltage information to feed a scope that is multiplying point by point samples with another varying voltage.  Even one or two degree errors caused by scope probe delays being uneven between probes are considered too large for accurate power calculations according to Tektronix App Notes.

Those other ones, that show an absolutely flatline out to 100MHz are at minimum 10 Ohms as graphed.  So a little high for shunt use.  I see you are understanding the basic problem and that's excellent.  It is extremely difficult to obtain accurate current information from even the best low-inductance shunt resistors in the sub-ohm range at RF frequencies.

There are three approaches I know of that work:

1)  A small ultra hi Q porcelain RF capacitor like the ATC 100B or 100C types (American Technical Ceramics) series capacitor can be used to exactly cancel (series resonate to a dead short) the inductance portion.  Sadly, this only works at one frequency so it is not a good general purpose solution and it's no good for waveforms that contain lots of harmonics (not pure single-frequency sine waves).  It also destroys the DC path, so is only good in AC-only measurements.

2)  A currrent probe costing thousands of dollars can be used instead of a shunt.  To give good honest results in a point-by-point sampled multiplying situation, however, this probe not only needs to be very wide band and DC accurate, but its phase delay would need to be precisely matched to whatever probe was being used to get the voltage samples.  These things are easy to say but extremely difficult to actually accomplish.

3)  Forget all about using data sample muiltiplication and use a low-pass filter on the shunt to get the net DC equivalent current.  The integrator nature of an RC filter will undo the differentiator nature of the shunt inductance. This only works when the other argument (voltage) is a steady DC voltage and you therefore needn't be concerned about power factor or phase shifts introduced between the voltage and current samples.

This is the technique I've been recommending for the Ainslie device and works well for measuring the input power to any black box whose power supply is a battery or fixed DC supply.

I do not know of any commercial wideband RF power meter that uses discrete sampling and multiplying techniques.  The most accurate ones seem to rely on either bolometer techniques (measuring the heating power) or by using a wideband 50 ohm load(which is standard in RF work and are readily available with flat (non-reactive) resistances out to 18GHz or more).  With a known resistive load, you just measure the voltage and find the power by e^2/R.  These approaches are no good, however, for measuring the input power to a device.

Humbugger
 

Hum,

Here is the best current sense resistor I have found so far.
See attached data sheet.

GL.
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #406 on: 2011-03-30, 00:11:08 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
This thread is now closed, indefinitely.

Well, since we are still discussing technical aspects of the oscillation, it would be more appropriate to do so here.
« Last Edit: 2011-04-15, 02:01:09 by poynt99 »


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  Groundloop
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #407 on: 2011-04-13, 21:00:06 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 336
What is making the Rosmary circuit oscillate when the gate input is negative?

GL.
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #408 on: 2011-04-13, 22:22:15 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: Groundloop on 2011-04-13, 21:00:06
What is making the Rosmary circuit oscillate when the gate input is negative?

GL.

Alex,

There's still no concrete evidence imho to indicate exactly what is causing her setup to oscillate. One unknown is whether a negative offset is required at all; I don't believe it is.

From what I see, the circuit has a propensity to oscillate as long as the Gate voltage drive is 0V or below. The Gate is then being modulated by either inductive pickup or capacitive coupling from the Source and/or the Drain. It may be a Class-C type operation, or it may operate similar to the BJT Joule Thief.

I have a suspicion that the function generator impedance of 50 Ohms is not seen by the Gate and in fact the leads are acting as an "open-ended" transmission line. We've been modeling this using a 1uH inductor, but I think a TL is more appropriate. It's just a matter of getting it to work however, and this apparently is not that easy, I've tried.

Anyhow, the big question in my mind, is "why is the CSR voltage biased to the negative?"

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  humbugger
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #409 on: 2011-04-14, 04:28:25 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99

Anyhow, the big question in my mind, is "why is the CSR voltage biased to the negative?"

.99

One guess is that there are holes blown in the gate oxide due to overvoltage spiking.  Mosfets are known to keep operating albeit with degraded performance when this happens.  One of the performance degradations is, of course, significant DC current leakage occurs between gate and source.

Another puzzle is why there are now two distinct phases of oscillation...the "hammerhead effect" so to speak.  For the first 30 seconds or so, the oscillations are much larger and have a huge negative peak excursion.  Then, all on their own it seems, they calm down to a much lower steady state.  This new burst envelope seems to have become the norm after the recent repairs and MOSFET replacements of 2 out of 5 parts.  

Based on the time constant (30+ seconds), I'd guess it's something thermally-related and may also have to do with partially-perforated gate oxides and leakage currents.  Just wild guesses, though.  Rosemary has never commented nor answered my queries about this new burst envelope, so it's probably not something intentional or that she can explain.  (Is there anything Rosemary can't explain?  Ever?  I take that back...I meant anything she wants to try to explain to me)

I think Chef's post after she showed a few scope traces with dead flatline noise yet still providing "negative numbers" presumed to prove battery charging said it all...

Humbugger
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #410 on: 2011-04-15, 02:03:26 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: humbugger on 2011-04-14, 04:28:25
One guess is that there are holes blown in the gate oxide due to overvoltage spiking.  Mosfets are known to keep operating albeit with degraded performance when this happens.  One of the performance degradations is, of course, significant DC current leakage occurs between gate and source.

Another puzzle is why there are now two distinct phases of oscillation...the "hammerhead effect" so to speak.  For the first 30 seconds or so, the oscillations are much larger and have a huge negative peak excursion.  Then, all on their own it seems, they calm down to a much lower steady state.  This new burst envelope seems to have become the norm after the recent repairs and MOSFET replacements of 2 out of 5 parts. 

Based on the time constant (30+ seconds), I'd guess it's something thermally-related and may also have to do with partially-perforated gate oxides and leakage currents.  Just wild guesses, though.  Rosemary has never commented nor answered my queries about this new burst envelope, so it's probably not something intentional or that she can explain.  (Is there anything Rosemary can't explain?  Ever?  I take that back...I meant anything she wants to try to explain to me)

I think Chef's post after she showed a few scope traces with dead flatline noise yet still providing "negative numbers" presumed to prove battery charging said it all...

Humbugger

These are certainly possibilities Hum, thanks for bringing those ideas up.

Just to play devil's advocate a little here, regardless of what may be causing this effect where the CSR mean is negative, does this not still imply that a net current is going back into the battery?

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #411 on: 2011-04-15, 04:14:45 »
Group: Guest
Howdy all,

Well there still is the question of the "LOAD" inductor or resistor that is being used for all the oscilloscope shots with the results all over the place that has been hand selected for our enjoyment and discussion. This images attached are the only ones that has been supplied as evidence of what is being used and can be seen in the epic YouTube video of the proposed energy made up from zippieons recharging a bank of five (5) 100Ah batteries.

We have been assuming this inductor or resistor used is 10 Ohms and from the attached images provided looking at the material used, length and diameter of the actual element would suggest to me it's about 1 Ohm or less "MAXIMUM" !!

Where is the "Temperature Profile" for this inductor or resistor under test load in all these oscilloscope shots for a start the BASICS of a proper analysis ??

Regard's
Glen
 :)   
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #412 on: 2011-04-15, 18:58:31 »
Group: Guest
Hi All,

Well I've been finally included in the evening delusion after commenting and posting ( http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=13.msg13005#msg13005 ) on the bogus information that was given on the "LOAD" inductor or resistor being around 1 Ohm because of the material, diameter and length of the element, and is no where close to 10 Ohms as stated by Rosemary. Of course there is no thermo profiling that has ever been done and presented to the open source community she has neglected it as not being required for any proof of the circuit operational claim and her zippieon thesis.


http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10407.msg281605#msg281605
Quote
Poynty - please get those fatuous and entirely erroneous comments of FuzzyTomCat off that thread.  It's already been polluted out of mind.

Now she off again on more unrelated subjects having nothing to do at all with the device that the restricted to everyone but her "SOAP BOX" thread at OU.com was created for "PROOF OF CONCEPT". There is four hundred seventeen ( 417 ) posts starting February 21, 2011 ..... two (2) months of nothing again .... only unwanted lip service nonsense the same hand waving garbage now for over ten years.

It's also quite obvious that this circuit is way, way, way out of Stefans league at OU.com and has given little to no direction on the testing and evaluation results that has been posted on his "click" advertisement forum site .... at least Aaron at Energetic Forum had the balls to do some hands on work trying to do some evaluation whether it was done right or wrong and .99 involvement on three forums doing actual testing.

Fuzzy
 :) 
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #413 on: 2011-04-15, 22:12:38 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
How can you be sure that load resistor is not the reported 11 Ohms Glen?

I would think that this would be an easy measurement for them to get correct, no?

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #414 on: 2011-04-15, 23:33:06 »
Group: Guest
Fuzzy:

There was a thermal profiling supplied for the heating element in Rosemary's last presentation.  However there was no official crunching of power in vs. power out.  Chet, are the "shorting coil" boys making any progress on that front?

Rosemary:

I will tackle the capacitor issue since you mentioned it again.

Here is the basic test:  You have six batteries in series, so what you are going to do is replace one of the batteries in the middle of the pack with a capacitor to run this test.

You need a big electrolytic capacitor, one that looks like a 300 ml coke can.  The rated voltage should be 25 volts.  I am not sure, but one of them is probably between 10,000 and 25,000 microfarads.  If they are 10,000 you might need to wire two in parallel.  The wiring should ideally be done with thick-gauge wires that terminate in eyelets that can be screwed down to the terminals.

Here is a picture of one:



Note the cap in the picture has a rating of 450 volts, but you must get one or more with a rating of 25 volts.

I haven't calculated the expected voltage drop over time if the capacitor is driving a 15 watt load (is that the approximate wattage?) but I will leave that to someone else.

Here is what we ideally want:  We want to see the capacitor voltage change by two volts or less over a time period that ranges between two and ten seconds.

As the capacitance gets larger, the voltage will change more slowly as your circuit runs.

Why do we want what we want:   So that we can measure the the start voltage, the time, and the end voltage on a multimeter.  That's how you run the test.  You just turn your setup on and then off and record the amount of time it was on and the start and end capacitor voltage readings.  Simple enough, no?

Continuing on.....
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #415 on: 2011-04-16, 00:02:22 »
Group: Guest
Okay, now let's discuss the mechanics of wiring the big capacitor into the setup.

You will need a 500 ohm 1/2 watt resistor, you will use this to charge up the big capacitor.

Let's say you are going to substitute the third battery in the chain to run the test.

So you disconnect the wire between the positive terminal of the third battery and the negative terminal of the second battery. The third battery has now been taken out of the circuit.

Note that electrolytic capacitors like this are polarized.  It's very important that you don't charge the capacitor up with the wrong voltage polarity.

Connect the negative terminal of the capacitor to the negative terminal of the third battery.

Now, using your 500-ohm resistor,  connect the third battery's positive terminal to the resistor and then to the positive terminal of the capacitor.

Watch the voltage on the capacitor slowly rise with your multimeter.  Simply clip the multimeter on the capacitor and leave it connected.

When the voltage on the capacitor is nearly the third battery's voltage, remove the resistor and just make a short circuit between the two positive terminals.

Now the capacitor is ready for the test and is charged to the third battery's voltage.

Connect the capacitor's positive terminal to the negative terminal of the second battery.  Now the capacitor is wired into the circuit and taking over the function of the third battery.

You are now ready to do your testing.   The logical thing to do is do several runs with different time intervals recording voltage changes on the capacitor of two volts or less.  The voltage data will be very accurate.  If you have an iPhone or a stopwatch and can synchronize the power on-off with the stopwatch then you will be in great shape.

I just realized that you would want a time interval of five second runs or more, and hopefully the capacitor voltage will not change by more than two volts during that time period.  You want longer times to increase the accuracy of your time measurement.

Every time you do a new test run you have to recharge the capacitor.  Do not let the circuit run unattended at all.  If it ran unattended there is a very good chance that the voltage on the capacitor would eventually reverse polarity and you could have another form of meltdown.

And that's it.  The capacitor voltage change over time will tell you the direction and magnitude of the current flow through the current sensing resistor.

If the capacitor voltage increases then you are over unity and COP infinity.

If the capacitor voltage decreases then you have to compare the measured power output against the thermal profiling of your heating element to see if you are over unity or not.

All of this can be found out from this one simple test.

Of course you will want to verify that the oscillations are there when you first set up the test.  You should see the identical waveforms but you might notice a slight droop or slight frequency shift over time as you watch the test run.  That's nothing, it's just because the voltage of the 72-volt battery bank is changing slightly because one of the batteries is now a large capacitor.

MileHigh
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #416 on: 2011-04-16, 00:09:47 »
Group: Guest
One last issue, about the actual wiring.

Ideally, you would do your hookups with heavy-gauge wires that terminate in crimp-on eyelets and fasten everything in place with machine screws.

The wiring connections are not super-critical, but they should still be reasonably good.

If I had the larger-sized alligator clip leads I would make three alligator clip-lead connections between the capacitor negative terminal and the third battery's negative terminal.  I would use three alligator clip-lead connections for the other connection.

Make sure the alligator clips are firmly connected to the battery and capacitor posts.

That should do it.

Caution because an alligator clip lead causing a short on one of your big batteries would turn red hot in about five seconds.
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #417 on: 2011-04-16, 00:47:07 »
Group: Guest
Finally a comment from the peanut gallery.

From what I understand you have no idea what the true condition of your batteries is.  It's not critical but it would be nice to know that all of your batteries are reasonably healthy.  You could put a battery charger on them.

But you can do a simple brute force and quick test.  For your big batteries, let's see how they individually perform driving about a 5 amp load.

So R = 12.6/5 = 2.52 ohms.   So if you have two one-ohm current sensing resistors put them in series.

The power dissipation will be 12.6^2/2 = 79 watts.    That's way too high.

Change the load to four one-ohm current sensing resistors in series.  Now the power consumption is about 40 watts.

If your current sensing resistors are 5 watts you will be fine.

So just short that four-ohm load across each individual battery for about three seconds and look at the voltage drop on the battery.  If the battery voltage takes a slight dip, say less than 0.3 volts, the battery is good.  If the voltage drops by more than a volt, the battery is weak and is the a weak link in your battery chain.  I am flying by the seat of my pants for the numbers that I am quoting.

All experimenters should become adept at this simple battery test.  You can get to know your batteries much better like this and monitor their health over time.
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #418 on: 2011-04-16, 00:58:26 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-15, 22:12:38
How can you be sure that load resistor is not the reported 11 Ohms Glen?

I would think that this would be an easy measurement for them to get correct, no?

.99

Well I'm not sure enough to say .... are you positive .... whom took the measurements .... Rosemary ? As MileHigh said there was no official crunching of power in vs. power out .... why is this ?? I've looked quite extensively for materials for elements for use in the 10 Ohm range and could never find something so large in diameter in the short length it is .... how could this be ??

The only time a temperature was shown was for a very short time with the inductor resistor connecting wires covered was the temperature rising or falling ?? What was the wattage draw for the temperature in that video demonstration at that short moment in time ??

Does it make any difference on any of the oscilloscope shots if the inductor resistor was connected or not ? Would it make any difference if the actual resistance of the inductor was 0 through 11 ohms on calculations ?

Please remember all the other experimentalist before us that used in their presentations and documentation, photos, videos and live demonstrations everything and anything to do what is necessary for real excepted proof ... has the bar been lowered so very far as just a few minor cherry picked selected oscilloscope shots form any one person to "claim" proof of concept on another new so called discovery is all that's required ? If the bar has been lowered to such a great extent now it's just a matter of time for shady inventors to modify data and oscilloscope shots with image editors changing document dates and time stamps and compile a great one off experimental device run of a life time ... fraud will abound everywhere and in some cases may have already started.

Best Regard's
Glen
 :)
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #419 on: 2011-04-16, 01:14:45 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
One thing to keep in mind Glen, is that the power in SA is probably 220V, not 110V like ours.

So 220V/11 Ohms is about 20 Amps and about 4400W. This seems quite doable.

Now, imagine a 1 Ohm value; we are looking at 220 Amps, and 48.4kW.  :o

I really doubt it can be the latter case. ;)

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #420 on: 2011-04-16, 02:12:00 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-16, 01:14:45
One thing to keep in mind Glen, is that the power in SA is probably 220V, not 110V like ours.

So 220V/11 Ohms is about 20 Amps and about 4400W. This seems quite doable.

Now, imagine a 1 Ohm value; we are looking at 220 Amps, and 48.4kW.  :o

I really doubt it can be the latter case. ;)

.99

Well from what I can recall this was custom made inductor ( http://www.energeticforum.com/102109-post613.html ) she had to wait for and not off the shelf to go into the small copper water heater that was made almost a Year ago ( http://www.energeticforum.com/94900-post563.html ) in the attached images.

I do agree on SA having 220 volt ... but ... these components were custom made as we were told to use with the 60 VDC switching mosfet circuit in mind, and 4400W would be kind of large for the volume of fluid used in the application it was intended for I would think  ;)

The other odd thing is If you look very closely at the inductor resistor there is no insulator between the two ends of the element and the threaded cap, you can even see the solder on the copper .... looks like a dead short to me.

I could be wrong but .....

 :)
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #421 on: 2011-04-16, 02:59:47 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: FuzzyTomCat on 2011-04-16, 02:12:00


The other odd thing is If you look very closely at the inductor resistor there is no insulator between the two ends of the element and the threaded cap, you can even see the solder on the copper .... looks like a dead short to me.

I could be wrong but .....

 :)

I wouldn't count on the thing being custom made.

Also, what do you mean by insulation between the two ends? I see no short anywhere. The threaded cap and the outer pipe are connected sure, but the conductive element is inside the pipe, and it is insulated.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #422 on: 2011-04-16, 04:02:08 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: Groundloop on 2011-04-13, 21:00:06
What is making the Rosmary circuit oscillate when the gate input is negative?

GL.

I've tested this in SPICE, and I can get indefinite oscillation by giving it a single pulse from 5V to 0V. (I think Hum did too).

What's making this thing oscillate? Here's a possibility:

Barkhausen criteria for oscillation:

1) The circuit requires gain.
2) The circuit requires a feedback mechanism, and the feedback must be in-phase.
3) The circuit forward and feedback gain product must be 1.
4) Not a requirement for oscillation, but usually some limiting mechanism is required to stabilize the amplitude.

1a) The MOSFET switch (any active switch really) is really just an amplifier with a lot of gain. In this case, a common-source amplifier.
2a) MOSFETS are notorious for exhibiting huge inter-electrode capacitance. Like any amplifier, the Common-source amp has it's bandwidth limitation, and this is largely due to the parasitic capacitance between the electrodes, in particular from Drain to Gate (whose effect is multiplied by the gain, i.e. Miller effect).
3a) If at the unity-gain frequency the phase is changed from 180º to 360º, then you now have all the ingredients required to create a self-sustained oscillation from a "simple" amplifier.
4a) In this case, I believe the limiting mechanism is either from the body diode partially conducting, or it's the quadratic VGS to ID relationship.

At any rate, that's my take so far from the testing I've done.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #423 on: 2011-04-16, 04:34:00 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-16, 02:59:47
I wouldn't count on the thing being custom made.

Also, what do you mean by insulation between the two ends? I see no short anywhere. The threaded cap and the outer pipe are connected sure, but the conductive element is inside the pipe, and it is insulated.

.99

RA posted several times at Energetic and Overunity she was having it made .... and .... Yep your correct its constructed similar to any standard 2000 - 4000 watt 240 Volt AC hot water heater element and a insulated conductor inside the tubing with the exception on the spiral twists which possibly could be effecting the oscilloscope wave form.

Is the element metallic copper threaded housing "grounded" to a earth ground as in a actual application that would be required for the proper operation of any "LOAD" short circuit protection device ( CB or Fuse ) needed in the application for personal and equipment protection ? There seems to be quite the amperage capacity in the battery bank and grounding and bonding a device that is made of a metallic material with a fluid inside like water would be a requirement anywhere installed .... and the grounding and bonding to earth of this part of the load resistor inductor housing will effect the readings taken  .....  IMHO

I still would like to see a actual for real thermo inductor resistor profile .... guess I'm just old fashion.

Oh well .... just kickin the can I guess .... she's already has claimed victory .... LOL

 O0
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Rosemary Ainslie Circuit « Reply #424 on: 2011-04-16, 04:59:50 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Glen,

I would say that the heater housing is not grounded nor connected to anything at all. It is probably floating wrt the battery. Normally, the grounding would be done by screwing the cap into a grounded structure.

Again, I'll be surprised if she actually had that heater coil element custom manufactured.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-27, 22:49:47