Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83889
  • *Latest: Kingkong

  • *Total Posts: 523346
  • *Total Topics: 15583
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 17

Author Topic: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 714887 times)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1905 on: April 07, 2012, 04:28:13 PM »
@MH: the FG leads can be clearly seen in the shot .99 posted to show me the heatsink. The positive lead is the red alligator clip and the ground lead snakes over behind the probe and connects to the common ground bus at left.
In other words, of course you are right about the connection used in the video. And it's contrary to the circuit schematic used in the video, reproduced below, which doesn't show the FG ground at all--- AND shows a 72 volt battery pack. Don't try this with a single mosfet unless you are properly heatsunk and even fan-cooled... or you have a lot of mosfets.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1906 on: April 07, 2012, 05:37:33 PM »
Rosemary:

I had another look at the clip and I realized that at the very beginning of the clip that you can clearly see that the function generator is grounded to the common grounding point for the probe grounds, which is the battery ground.

So now we are looking at another scenario:  When you wrote your two papers Rosemary you realized the mistake with respect to the grounding issue for the function generator.  It would not be correct to show the function generator bypassing the current sensing resistor because the current sensing resistor is supposed to be "pure" and account for all of the battery current.  Therefore you intentionally changed the simplified schematic diagrams in the papers to show the "negative" signal from the function generator connected before the current sensing resistor, even through you knew that this was not really the case.

Is the scenario that I just outlined above true Rosemary?

The simple fact is that you probably thought that it was a minor and benign change that nobody would notice and it would not really make any difference - or so you thought.

But the fact of the matter is that it makes a huge difference.  In the correct configuration as per the actually built device you have an AC-coupled signal going to the current sensing resistor.  There is no DC path at all in negatively offset oscillation mode.

It wasn't a benign change that nobody would notice, it's a complete and total screw up.

MileHigh

MileHigh I've answered from the get go.  From our very first post that Poynty made on this forum and my previous thread.  Pay attention.  Our demonstration was only to show that there was a coincidence in numbers between the Tektronix and the Le Croy.  This because the Tektronix is NOT grounded.  Therefore grounding issues related to incorrect readings could be obviated.  This is widely denied - but I'm not about to engage in yet another argument about that.

NOW.  To accommodate 8 probes and their respective ground terminals - and the applied signal from the function generator - we simply ran out of space.  Therefore, for the purposes of that demo we simply hooked the signal generator's probe to an available point which was 'behind' the CSR and in directly line with the battery negative.  We KNOW that it makes no significant difference to the values of the current.  We PROVE that it makes no significant difference in the tests detailed in our paper.  This because the CSR is NOT embedded in that loop for any of our tests that are included in our paper.  May I impose on you to drop this.  I assure you the tests for our paper ONLY have the CSR in line with the negative terminal of the battery.  NOTHING ELSE.  And - in point of fact, our signal probes are typically applied directly to the two gates of Q1 and Q2 respectively. 

And notwithstanding your assumption about this - it most certainly WAS, at it's MOST - a  benign change.  When I get the go ahead I'll be able to show you this.  There is very little difference between the values on the CSR regardless of the position of that ground terminal of the signal supply.

Regards,
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1907 on: April 07, 2012, 05:52:13 PM »
There is somewhat of an enigma about this "high heat mode."  Assuming that you are looking at a "correct" data capture where the Q1 MOSFET is functioning then you have the gate drive high and the CSR shows significant current flowing through the circuit.  There are no oscillations so I have to assume that the battery voltage is stable.

So during this part of the cycle you are looking at a 100% conventional setup, a single MOSFET, Q1, switches on and DC current flows through the load resistor and the MOSFET.  Certainly there is a likelihood that the MOSFET could be overstressed and is dissipating more power than you would like it to, but everything is 100% conventional and the DSO should record positive power during this phase.

Then if you go into oscillation mode and the other four MOSFETs start to spasm, isn't the implication that the DSO is recording enough "negative power" to completely compensate for the positive power recorded during the Q1 ON phase?
Not entirely MileHigh.  Each negative oscillation is matched by a positive.  And if you look at the math trace - then there's more returned to the battery during the oscillation phase than was delivered in 'on' phase.  But the actual question is WHERE does that positive half of each oscillation come from.  Which goes back to our early quarrel.  You claim that it can pass through the signal generator straight to the battery ground rail.  I don't buy that argument.  It's most easily refuted by the fact that we can get precisely the same oscillation from a 555 switch.  But there are more cogent arguments yet.  I just haven't got the patience to go through them again.

And I think I've answered your other points in my previous post.

Regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1907 on: April 07, 2012, 05:52:13 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1908 on: April 07, 2012, 05:58:45 PM »
Good morning, Little Miss MOSFET.

And good morning to you too TinselKoala.  But we're actually romping into our early evening - which puts me way ahead of you. 

Rosie Pose

Pretty picture by the way.  Not sure you've done my figure justice.  But the face is good.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1909 on: April 07, 2012, 06:57:15 PM »
An item of possible interest to some of us.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FURkoitGRwI


And there seems to be something else very strange on that channel..... a fresh alt.snakeoil Video Report.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1909 on: April 07, 2012, 06:57:15 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1910 on: April 07, 2012, 07:45:26 PM »
So little miss mosfet "SUPER TROLL" ... Rosie Posie ...

So the device schematic from paper 2 ( ROSSI-JOP-2- PDF.pdf ) is wrong and the "correct" device schematic is in paper 1 ( ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF.pdf ) a typo you say.

The device schematic in paper 2 ( ROSSI-JOP-2- PDF.pdf ) the same device schematic posted in your miss mosfet "SUPER TROLL'S' BLOG site http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/04/109-simulated-circuit.html ( Simulation Schematic.jpg ) ( ROSSI-JOP-2-PDF_Q1_Q2_x4_.PNG ) were these device schematics used at "ALL" in your papers 1 & 2 or some other testing of yours anywhere ?

Yes or No ??  ???

Is that "ONE" question to hard now ....

No more blah, blah, blah ..... I'll keep posting this a thousand times just like you do your THESIS crap until you answer the question !!!

CHEERS,
FTC
 ::)
« Last Edit: April 08, 2012, 04:46:01 AM by fuzzytomcat »

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1911 on: April 07, 2012, 08:03:52 PM »
Rosemary,

Regarding Q1 not turning on when the scope shots say it should be...

I have looked at as many scope captures as I could find of your testing and it appears that in all captures made after 2-22-11, Q1 is not functioning as it should be.  Scope captures made on or before that date indicate that Q1 is performing as one would expect from the data indicated by the gate drive and CSR traces.  It appears that on 2-22-11 there were some particularly "spikey" tests being performed as the duty cycle was being modified and I suspect that Q1 was being stressed at that time.  If you have additional captures to look at, you should be able to narrow down the date when something happened to the Q1 portion of the circuit.  I hope that helps.

Regarding the location of the connection of the function generator lead's ground clip, it does matter a bit.  When the generator output swings negative, Q2 is biased on.  With the generator set to its full negative position, if the schematic of the output stage .99 posted some time ago is correct, a maximum of -14.5V can be present at the FG output terminal when measured open circuit.  With the internal Rgen of 50 ohms, this would bias Q2 on at approximately 200ma.  This 200ma. flows from the battery through Rload, Q2 and the functon generator.  (If Q2 is warmer than 25C, the bias current can be greater than the estimated 200ma. as the MOSFET threshold voltage is temperature dependent.)

If the FG's ground clip is connected to the battery negative, this 200ma. of bias current will not be displayed on the CSR traces and hence not accounted for in the math calculations.  If the FG's ground clip were connected to the end of the CSR opposite the battery minus connection, this 200 ma. of current would be indicated at the CSR as a continuous +50 millivolts by the CSR scope trace for the duration of the FG's negative voltage output.  As the cycle mean indicates -28mv or there abouts, this +50 mv, if not in the CSR loop, represents a sinificant error.

I wish you could make more data available regarding the "flat battery" test you discussed at the beginning of this thread.  That test seems very interesting and using only one MOSFET in the Q2 location and three flat batteries makes things a bit simpler to replicate.

I can accept that not all data is disclosed for various reasons, but if a time does come when additional info regarding that test can be made available, it would be very much appreciated if you would do so.

Thanks,
PW

 


   



 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1911 on: April 07, 2012, 08:03:52 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1912 on: April 07, 2012, 08:32:43 PM »
Hey little miss mosfet "SUPER TROLL"

I'd like to see this test replicated again, beside the "FLAT or DEAD" battery test you performed on "YOUR INVENTION".

http://www.overunity.com/10407/rosemary-ainslie-circuit-demonstration-on-saturday-march-12th-2011/msg288257/#msg288257   Reply #1396 on: May 24, 2011, 10:40:47 PM

Quote
I need to remind you Poynt.99 that this test of ours is replicated on the following variation.  1 battery - used - same supply used to generate the charge for the switch - THEREFORE no functions generator - NO long wires on that test - NO grounding issues - same evident zero voltage discharge - and temperature over the iron resistor at 240 degrees which was hot enough to vaporise solder.

1) one (1) battery
2) no function generator  ( wonder what was the duty cycle was )  ???
3) a 12 volt soldering iron       

Vaporized the "LEAD SOLDER" .... WOW .... 361.4 °F is the melting point, the Boiling point is 3180 °F and "VAPORIZATION" point is 179.5 KJ·mol−1  ..... incredible !!!   :o

This is a must see ...... for little miss mosfet the "SUPER TROLL" !!!!


Cheers,
FTC
 :)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1913 on: April 07, 2012, 08:54:32 PM »
Sounds all fluxed up to me.

 :o

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1913 on: April 07, 2012, 08:54:32 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1914 on: April 07, 2012, 11:18:39 PM »
TK:

I can try to make a "high heat mode" diagram in a few days.

PW:

Thanks for your comments.  I believe resolving the grounding issue for the function generator is part of arriving at the proper conclusion.

Rosemary:

Quote
We KNOW that it makes no significant difference to the values of the current.

Sorry, that's not going to fly.  You must have seen from a few days ago that TK confirmed the current flow through his function generator with a digital multimeter.  Poynt also agrees with this.  You saw PW's comments from earlier today.  The simple fact is that you don't understand how a function generator works and we do.  i also posted an Agilent application note a few weeks back (reposted later by TK) that shows how you can put a function generator into the current loop of a device under test to effectively increase the output voltage from the function generator.

This is a critical flaw in your measurements and shame on you for intentionally changing the simplified schematic diagram in your two papers to where you show the function generator "negative" terminal connected before the current sensing resistor.  We also know that you originally pathetically tried to lie about the miswiring of the Q2-Q5 MOSFETs as is evidenced in your clip.  That's two lies about your circuit topology where you have been caught red-handed.  There is a sanctity about not lying about your circuit configuration and your data when you present a paper and you broke it twice.  This is a zero tolerance zone.

Quote
Each negative oscillation is matched by a positive.  And if you look at the math trace - then there's more returned to the battery during the oscillation phase than was delivered in 'on' phase.  But the actual question is WHERE does that positive half of each oscillation come from.

This is because you are simply not understanding the fact that the signal you are seeing across the current sensing resistor is an AC-coupled signal coming from the Q2-Q5 MOSFETs that are acting like an AC oscillator.  "AC-coupled" means that there is no DC current flow through the current sensing resistor, all of the DC current flow is going through the function generator.

At best, what you see across the CSR might be an indication of the battery current, but that's all you know.  The battery current is flowing through the function generator and your DSO is not looking at it so your average power calculations are invalid.

The issue is not going away and that's why I called the marked-up image of the pegboard, the "Pegboard of Doom."

With this knowledge I can now articulate the proper "LEDs of Doom" configuration for you in negative oscillation mode:

1.  A pair of back-to-back LEDs in series with the CSR.  Both will light up because of the AC signal from the AC output from the AC-coupled Q2-Q5 MOSFET oscillator.

2.  A pair of back-to-back LEDs in series with the function generator output.  Only one LED will light up indicating that current is flowing clockwise through the circuit and the battery set is discharging.

The days for your proposition are numbered.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1915 on: April 07, 2012, 11:57:09 PM »
PW:

I just wanted to review the issue of the ground location for the function generator and measuring the battery current flow with you in a bit more detail.  I am under the impression that you view the current going through the CSR as still being indicative of the battery current flow even though you are aware of the fact that current is also flowing through the function generator.  Although I am not so sure you still think like this because of your recent posting to Rosemary about this issue.   All that being said, here goes...

You can look at the Q2-Q5 array as a black box with three ports.  There is a current in port, I_IN, a current out port, I_OUT, and then the AC current output port, AC_OUT.

We know that the black box is drawing power from the power supply via I_IN and I_OUT ports.  Current, i(t), flows through the device and there is some sort of voltage drop, v(t), across the device.  We don't necessarily know what i and v are at any specific time, but we know that (i(t) x v(t)) represents the instantaneous power consumption of the device.

We also know that the sum of the currents I_IN, I_OUT, and AC_OUT equal zero.

With respect to power, we know that the device dissipates power as a function of time, p(t).  We also know that it outputs power to the outside world via the AC_OUT port, and that is a function of time, p_ac(t).

What does this all boil down to?  The true battery current can be monitored on I_IN or I_OUT.  You don't really have to care about the AC current flowing in and out of AC_OUT.

The Q2-Q5 MOSFET array in negative oscillation mode is just a black box that dissipates battery power, that's the only thing that you have to worry about.  The black box happens to have a port that exports AC power to the outside world, but all of that power is accounted for if you simply measure the current flowing through the black box and measure the battery voltage.  Does that make sense to you?

So, in plain English, the true current being drawn by the circuit is through the function generator.  You can completely ignore the AC current going through the CSR because all of the power is accounted for by measuring the current going through the function generator and the battery voltage.

So, assuming that makes sense to you, then the next problem is measuring the true battery voltage.  The assumption is that the battery is powering the circuit with steady DC and the circuit itself is sending an AC voltage signal back to the battery.  At the very high frequency of the AC signal, the battery simply looks like a high-impedance load.  As a result you are seeing a "fake" AC waveform superimposed on the true DC battery voltage.

The issue of the battery voltage may be a lot more complicated than that, but that's my first crack at it.  You have those long battery wires also so if you have a black box injecting a 2 MHz voltage signal back to the battery, you have to start looking at things like the impedance vs. frequency for all of the devices, etc, etc.  It's somewhat of a mess.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1915 on: April 07, 2012, 11:57:09 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1916 on: April 08, 2012, 12:26:31 AM »
"Somewhat" is right.

So.. what happens when NO FG is used at all, nothing hooked to the circuit at its points, and one simply "tickles" the Q1 gate/Q2 source  with a suitable resistor attached to batt positive? By tickle I mean no full contact, just a scratch and then removal.

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1917 on: April 08, 2012, 12:43:51 AM »
MH,

I would think that only the Q2 DC bias current (likely around 200ma +/- 50ma) and less than 20% (possibly closer to or less than 10%) of the AC current would be unaccounted for during the osc phase if the FG common was connected to BAT- instead of the CSR.  The bulk of the AC current would bypass the FG via the Ciss reactance of all the MOSFET's which would be much less than Rgen at Fosc.

PW

 

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1918 on: April 08, 2012, 12:49:58 AM »
Hi TK:

With just a tickle and no function generator I think Q1 would start to spontaneously oscillate and some current wold flow through the CSR.  Q2-Q5 would probably oscillate as a slave to Q1.  They Q2-Q5 gate input comes from the Q1 source and the Q2-Q5 source would feed back to the Q1 gate.  Note also though that the Q2-Q5 gate input is tied close to ground by the CSR which and the Q2-Q5 source is on the same node as the Q1 gate.  You note that the Q1 gate input is quasi-floating.  It's floating as long as Q2-Q5 are off.

There is a chance that nothing would happen also but I suspect that Q1 would oscillate.

MileHigh

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1919 on: April 08, 2012, 12:56:23 AM »
TK,

Fast tickle= partial turn on of Q1
Slow tickle= greater turn on of Q1

Q2 stays off, Q1 gets warm until leakage current turns it back off.

PW

 

OneLink