PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-26, 15:28:48
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Author Topic: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments?  (Read 342652 times)
Group: Guest
TK made this great little U-tube and Poynt posted it in his Oscilloscope power measurement thread.  Because it so nicely illustrates the kinds of errors that simple variations in probe/ground placement can induce, I thought it should be linked in this thread and possibly others as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWDfrzBIxoQ&feature=player_embedded#!

It would have been even more striking had he continued to re-configure the ground until the trace from the current probe looked exactly like that of the shunt/voltage probe.  Probably not possible with the length of the ground clip wire he was using.

In the RF power work I've done, you quickly find out that using any length at all on your probe ground wire is a no-no.  We always used little tiny short spring-wire grounds that attach right to the tip of the probe and always built our circuits compactly (using the shortest leads possible or surface mount parts soldered to each other) on a ground plane.  Even that was insufficient in many cases.  

If you really want to know what your circuit is doing, and you use a high bandwidth scope, you MUST use impeccable methods.  If the object is to ooo and aah and play with the mystical spiky waves all day, attributing magical properties to them, then by all means, put your circuit together with clip-leads and long wires over a large area and use real long ground leads on your scope probes!  

All of this is why I highly recommend using simple RC integration techniques close to the shunt itself when measuring current to derive power in pulsing circuits.  Especially if you are not an experienced expert in scope probing or don't have a wideband AC/DC current probe.
« Last Edit: 2011-01-19, 10:49:00 by humbugger »
   
Group: Guest
Yes indeed TinselKoala made an awesome little clip there.  It's quite striking how the spike appears in his voltage waveform when he moves his ground clip down the wire and further away from the resistor.  It's very evident how this can mess up your measurements.

Now, I am going to go slightly off-topic and pose a related question for the masses.  The question is why does that voltage spike appear when he moves the ground clip?

Please no cheating from some of the contributors to the forum that we suspect will know the answer.  You are excluded from the pop quiz.  Why does the spike appear?

Note that if you understand why the spike appears you should be able to appreciate the point made in TK's clip that much more.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2011-01-19, 11:59:14 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Is it the zipon radiant energy of cold electricity being longitudinally propagated away from the shunt resistor in its never-ending search for a battery to charge and gaining free energy from the dark matter hidden inside the copper wire?  Just an educated guess.
   
Group: Guest
Is it the zipon radiant energy of cold electricity being longitudinally propagated away from the shunt resistor in its never-ending search for a battery to charge and gaining free energy from the dark matter hidden inside the copper wire?  Just an educated guess.

No biatch!  Not even close!
   
Group: Guest
 :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

I'm through dealing with you pompous know-it-alls with closed minds!  I quit!

 :D

[edit] Please note:  After receiving two PMs suggesting I please not "quit" and a comment from Rose regarding this post, I guess my attempt at humor was taken seriously.  This post and the last one of mine and MH's one in between there were intended as wry sarcastic humor, which I will try to refrain from in other people's threads in the future simply because it might be taken seriously or might be found as snide or mean-spirited by some people here.  I was poking fun at folks who seem unable to accept any criticism when they are wrong. 
« Last Edit: 2011-01-20, 00:28:07 by humbugger »
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
The more people attempting to properly measure Lawrence's and Rose's devices the better.

So anyone who has the necessary resources and inclination, speak up. I believe allcanadian has offered to test Lawrence's JT. Any status on that?

I am now offering to test either device myself using the oscilloscope method . I presently have all or most of the necessary equipment, and hopefully in a short while, I will have a very nice set (or two) of new high-end Tektronix gear.

So, Lawrence and Rose, if you take up my offer, I would mostly be interested in testing your actual device, so it would have to be shipped to me. Obviously, it would have to be one which you claim exhibits OU.

.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
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
If there is no formal build spec, then count me out. I have had it with guessing games. The only excuse is finicky coils but we already know about them. This is then not open source.

As far as proper scope probe placement is concerned, of course, the lower the applied voltage used in the DUT, the more important it is to place probes away from any other lines leading to the DUT otherwise you will get mutual inductive effects. The probe wire is like any other wire even though you would think it is shielded. In my pulsing coils videos some of my coil/LED combos would light up when placed over the scope lead, so yes there is mutual induction happening all the time that can skew your results.

This again is why I am insisting on using the cap/cap method. This eliminates all requirements for probes since the only results that are important is DUT start and stop voltage of the feed and output caps. Four measurements and you will know right away if it is OU or not.

wattsup


---------------------------
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I would like to add to my previous post, and in particular regarding Lawrence's version of JT, once you are happy with a certain positioning of the various components, take a snapshot so that this configuration may be duplicated for testing at the device's new destination. Even better would be to place the device in an enclosure and fix in place all the components, while providing connectors for the sampling points in the circuit. Having said that, it would be advisable to replace all the alligator leads with short wiring.

.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
   
Group: Guest
I would be thrilled and honored to apply my test procedure as outlined in this thread

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=580.0

to Rosemary Ainslee's device.  I have a 4 Channel Tektronix 500MHz scope and good meters and a great bunch of Agilent System Power Supplies (66XX Series).  I decline to get into the business of building and tuning and tweaking her circuit or load.  That's my only caveat.

I would have to borrow a unit that has already been tuned up for performance satisfactory to Rose and a Rose-approved load resistor.  I don't have the time or inclination to go to all that trouble just to be told (in the event the results show a low COP) that I have built it wrong or tuned it wrong or used the wrong load.  I have a couple of good 18 Ah 12V Lead Acid Gel batteries and a lab thermometer.  I would gladly pay the return shipping and pack it with the utmost in care, returning it intact and promptly when the testing is done and results are published here on the forum (exclusively).  I would also sign an NDA, if that's desired.

Bryan
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
If there is no formal build spec, then count me out. I have had it with guessing games. The only excuse is finicky coils but we already know about them. This is then not open source.

As far as proper scope probe placement is concerned, of course, the lower the applied voltage used in the DUT, the more important it is to place probes away from any other lines leading to the DUT otherwise you will get mutual inductive effects. The probe wire is like any other wire even though you would think it is shielded. In my pulsing coils videos some of my coil/LED combos would light up when placed over the scope lead, so yes there is mutual induction happening all the time that can skew your results.

This again is why I am insisting on using the cap/cap method. This eliminates all requirements for probes since the only results that are important is DUT start and stop voltage of the feed and output caps. Four measurements and you will know right away if it is OU or not.

wattsup

wattsup,

You apparently missed the main point of my post and TK's video.

It is mostly in regards to series circuit inductance, i.e. stray or leakage inductance where there should not be any. While inductive coupling can play a role in what the probe might pick up, the video clearly demonstrates what a tiny bit of parasitic inductance will do when it exists in between the probe leads and in series with the CSR.

If TK had a few probe gnd leads of differing lengths, that too would have shown a similar effect, that being from the inductive coupling effect you mentioned.

.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
   
Group: Guest
I would like to add to my previous post, and in particular regarding Lawrence's version of JT, once you are happy with a certain positioning of the various components, take a snapshot so that this configuration may be duplicated for testing at the device's new destination. Even better would be to place the device in an enclosure and fix in place all the components, while providing connectors for the sampling points in the circuit. Having said that, it would be advisable to replace all the alligator leads with short wiring.

.99

I echo those sentiments regarding the Rosemary device.  It would be preferable if the device was contained in a sealed box that had tamper-proof "cal stickers" or something like that so no accusation of tampering could be levelled.  In the Rose device, there would be no need for any internal test point access; just two terminals for input power and two for the load resistor.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
wattsup,
You apparently missed the main point of my post and TK's video.

It is mostly in regards to series circuit inductance, i.e. stray or leakage inductance where there should not be any. While inductive coupling can play a role in what the probe might pick up, the video clearly demonstrates what a tiny bit of parasitic inductance will do when it exists in between the probe leads and in series with the CSR.

If TK had a few probe and leads of differing lengths, that too would have shown a similar effect, that being from the inductive coupling effect you mentioned.
.99

@99

I do understand about that regarding extra length circuit wires between test points. I just wanted to point out that it is not only the probe position but also how the probe wire is positioned and if it is crossing over any DUT wires.

Actually, TK could have made a video #2 to also show his ground lead being affected by simply running that ground as he did over the circuit before he connected it to either of those two points. It would have been good for him to show the same effect on the scope with the ground really coming from the outside only and not over the circuit to see the differences. Also, I would have liked to see the scope shot with that extra wire completely removed from the device having those two test points now as one point.

From the many difficulties of declaring OU with low voltage DUTs, it is becoming more evident that any intrusive measuring, even with your differential probe requirement as you have stated to Rose on the other thread, which is very educational I must add, there will always be points of contention with any such low voltage DUT declaration. There will always be something that someone will say is not right.

We seem to think that the OU aspect is load dependent, when it should not be. Energy output is energy output regardless of how you decide to either consume it on the spot or store it for ultimate comparisons. I feel the only real way the OU community will be satisfied will be either with an accepted cap/cap method having no outside measurement probes around the device while it is running, or you have to design your OU device in a loop that will run indefinitely with just one impulse charge. You therefore will be able to calculate joules in the former or just live the evident fact of OU with the later.

Either that or you will have to design an OU device that runs on voltages above and beyond running simple LEDs. That would require having the present build spec and working an upscaled design, but again, if there is no build spec, then what is the point.

wattsup


---------------------------
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
  Hmmm...  very interesting video by TK, thanks Humbugger, I agree with his caveats.  

  Before seeing this, I had watched the two following videos, both of which use modified JT circuits called Joule Ringer circuits, and both of which show strong evidence of rf-pickup --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5CKK_lFoZw  Shows double LED's and neon light, lighting up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOCUAL12Xsw&NR=1
Small radio picks up the radiated rf...

  Same caveats arise as from TK's video... short leads, etc.

The Joule Ringer circuit is intriguing...  Standard oscilloscope measurements become difficult.  The capacitor input allows energy-in measurement.  Capacitor on the output might work as wattsup suggests:

Quote
I feel the only real way the OU community will be satisfied will be either with an accepted cap/cap method having no outside measurement probes around the device while it is running, or you have to design your OU device in a loop that will run indefinitely with just one impulse charge. You therefore will be able to calculate joules in the former or just live the evident fact of OU with the later.

Either that or you will have to design an OU device that runs on voltages above and beyond running simple LEDs.

But I also like the thermal method recommended earlier in this thread, which we tried once on the output of the Tseung DUT.
   
Group: Guest
The TK video showing effect of long wires producing inductance or other effects that may affect the Oscilloscope Displays:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWDfrzBIxoQ

Many thanks to TK in producing this very educational video clip.  It explains why small changes in the Physical Layout or wiring can affect the displayed values.  I believe PhysicsProf also experienced that already.  We discovered that in the Hong Kong University Workshop on Oct 9, 2010 where some participants produced FLEET prototype with Tseung FLEET Comparison Index of more than 280 and some produced prototype with Index less than 1.  They all listened to the same lecture, used the same batch of material and the same test equipment.

*** My explanation is that the configuration happened to be in a pseudo resonance condition.  To get the correct COP, we need to simultaneously measure the Input and Output Instantaneous Power.  It would be good to have both the Power Curves and the running mean value on the two oscilloscopes.

The more people attempting to properly measure Lawrence's and Rose's devices the better.

So anyone who has the necessary resources and inclination, speak up. I believe allcanadian has offered to test Lawrence's JT. Any status on that?

I am now offering to test either device myself using the oscilloscope method . I presently have all or most of the necessary equipment, and hopefully in a short while, I will have a very nice set (or two) of new high-end Tektronix gear.

So, Lawrence and Rose, if you take up my offer, I would mostly be interested in testing your actual device, so it would have to be shipped to me. Obviously, it would have to be one which you claim exhibits OU.

.99

Dear poynt99,

I have communicated with allcanasian.  He may not have access to two good oscilloscopes that have the multiply and the mean functions.  He was going to use a different method for determining whether the COP was greater than 1.

I asked him to hold off until the PhysicsProf has done the experiments using the oscilloscope method.

If you have two sets of new high-end Tektronix gear, please indicate the model number and I shall be happy to ship you a prototype with high Tseung FLEET Comparison Index from Hong Kong.  The prototype should have Index greater than 100 and actual mean output wattage greater than 20 watts.  I shall ask the Hong Kong experimenter(s) to enclose it in a transparent container and try to protect it from any shaking or movement from the shipping. 

The prototype I shipped to Bob Boyce in USA got damaged.  A soldered connection was broken even though I put it inside a padded box.  Thus some caution must be observed when you receive the prototype.

The pictures, video and the test results from the China-made oscilloscopes will be shown first in this thread before the shipment.  Thanks to you, we can now have running mean Input and Output Power values.

Your task will first be a simple matter of verification and confirming the results from Hong Kong and then replicate it from the components package that will be shipped together with the working prototype.  That should be fun for you.

We shall invite comments from the Forum Members to see if such arrangement is acceptable.  The Hong Kong team will be happier if they can get your Prize.  If there were additional requirements, please post them now.

Thank you and we look forward to benefiting the World together.

Lawrence
   
Group: Guest
Poynty and Humbugger - thanks for your offers to test - but I'll pass.  I'd prefer this to first be done by local experts for a variety of reasons - not least of which is the real and present danger of dedicated objectors that lurk these forums.  All over the place.   :o

But if and when we do a public demo - then, thereafter, and if Professor is up for it - I would LOVE to send him our apparatus for confirmation.  Hopefully he'll discuss the required protocols with Poynty Point.  Frankly I'd be prepared to trust the two of them - entirely.  But nor will I compete with Lawrence's prize application.  That's a given.  I really think that the Joule Thief variant is a well deserved contender.  But we're some way away.  Have only now determined the feasibility of doing a public demo.  I'll first need to see if this is ever likely to happen.  And even before then - I'll need to establish some reliable results.  Right now the circuit is in sulk mode and all I can get from it is resonance with absolutely no heat.  Hopefully this is correctible.  Otherwise you'll all be hearing some reluctant retractions to earlier claims.  God forbid.

 :'(

Rosie

 :)
   
Group: Guest
Is it the zipon radiant energy of cold electricity being longitudinally propagated away from the shunt resistor in its never-ending search for a battery to charge and gaining free energy from the dark matter hidden inside the copper wire?  Just an educated guess.

HUMBUGGER.  Indeed.  Well done.  You are clearly a man of quintessential discernment and appropriate gravitas.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

I'm through dealing with you pompous know-it-alls with closed minds!  I quit!

 :D

Spoken like a man.  Well done again.

Rosie

 :)
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

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

Why not let people test it using their various means, as long as the method is appropriate and executed properly? (i.e. thermal etc.)

If you decide to send me a unit to test, I will test it according to good practices, as I have outlined here. I have no control over how the testing is performed anywhere else and by anyone else, and to be honest with you, I trust almost no one but myself. Unless a great deal of detail is provided by those performing the tests, it would be difficult to compare and verify. The numbers, properly obtained however, will speak for themselves.

I can assure you, that if I feel my test results are not solid and reliable, I will state this. However, with the equipment I have now at my disposal (1GHz 4-channel Tektronix scope, plus various current probes, and a differential probe), I should be able to easily surpass the quality of oscilloscope testing done by anyone thus far. I know the methods, the equipment, the pitfalls, and the subtleties involved.

In addition as I mentioned earlier, I may have access to two new sets of high end Tektronix equipment, in a short while's time. If this equipment arrives, it would be used to verify my previous test results obtained with my own high end equipment.

.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
   
Group: Guest

I read a predictable round of applause for TK's video where he rather ponderously compares one junction of the wire to another junction from what?  The blue wire?  I'm as blind as a bat which possibly explains why I can't see see this.  Not even close.  Actually that's also not right.  It IS close to the blue wire.  Just not ON the blue wire. 

Rosemary     
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I read a predictable round of applause for TK's video where he rather ponderously compares one junction of the wire to another junction from what?  The blue wire?  I'm as blind as a bat which possibly explains why I can't see see this.  Not even close.  Actually that's also not right.  It IS close to the blue wire.  Just not ON the blue wire. 

Rosemary     

What are you actually trying to say here Rose?

.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
   
Group: Guest
Rose,

I don't care much for many of the aspects of TK's work. However, I can assure you, even if he didn't make the connections he claimed, that little loop of short wire would cause that particular change in the scope display.

There should be no doubts the video contents were completely correct.

A bit of stray inductance or capacitance does make a great deal of difference in scope displays whenever the frequency or rise/fall time goes beyond the design of the circuit.

Of course, this is only my opinion. This opinion is based upon decades of experience with such circuits and test equipment. I don't need the theory or math to convince me.

Respectfully,

John (WW)
   
Group: Guest
A bit of stray inductance or capacitance does make a great deal of difference in scope displays whenever the frequency or rise/fall time goes beyond the design of the circuit.

Of course, this is only my opinion. This opinion is based upon decades of experience with such circuits and test equipment. I don't need the theory or math to convince me.

I'll take that as a halfhearted attempt to answer the pop quiz and unfortunately it's incorrect.  Theory and math should not be so casually brushed aside by you.  Theory and math is what electronics and by extension every other energy system is all about.  Understanding how the world goes round is what allows us to make the world go round.
   
Group: Guest
I'll take that as a halfhearted attempt to answer the pop quiz and unfortunately it's incorrect.  Theory and math should not be so casually brushed aside by you.  Theory and math is what electronics and by extension every other energy system is all about.  Understanding how the world goes round is what allows us to make the world go round.

You took it wrong.

I could give a Rat's behind about your pop quiz. I meant what I said. I don't need either to convince me these problems happen. I understand the math and the theory so I understand why it happens. I don't need them to believe it happens.

If I wished to jump on your pop quiz hook I would have done so.

So.....  Stuff it.

Inappropriate and rude. Sorry.
   
Group: Guest
Well if you are going to be rude and say that you understand the math and the theory, then why not answer the pop quiz?
   
Group: Guest
Well if you are going to be rude and say that you understand the math and the theory, then why not answer the pop quiz?

I don't like to read into people's mind but it's a habbit of mine.

I think your pop quiz involve a situation "if the blue wire was straighten out", what would happens? ^-^
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 15:28:48