COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[FuzzyTomCat]

@Glen,

I can't say thanks enough for all your ambition and hard work. I would like to get the temp data associated with the 520V run. If you can Skype me the pics, I'll key them into Excel

Hi Harvey,

This last test of mine the one on 10-05-09 I didn't take the same detailed 6 hour results as I had before because of three reasons "first" I was playing around at first trying to find a sweet spot for a COP which I did, and "second" the temperature values that were recorded always was so close within 1 degree F, and the "third" I was shocked at what I was seeing on the Tektronix TDS 3054C thinking to myself what I possibly have was OU contacting Rosemary and Aaron for some words of wisdom.

The test #3 started at 10-05-09 @ 17:30 and at 18:40 PDT I did some images and data dumps of 20us,2us & 400us some images were sent and seen by Aaron and Rosie for reference only on my 520V spike finding, these all were unpublished or posted ...... and at 23:00 PDT a second set of images and data dumps were taken and published in my posting ..... continued running the test until 10-06-09 @ 01:00 for about seven hours.

The temperatures were all stable as before in all my prior testing and the prototype Quantum "load resistor" stayed at 129 to 130 degrees F constantly as all other recorded tests of mine that had no large variations in temperature readings.

I need to get a 12VDC or 24VDC power supply because I don't have one to do the prototype 10 ohm load resistor wattage recording now, so I'm still trying to gather useful data until this happens.

Thanks for all your support and encouragement

Glen

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT- If you would like copy's of the 10-05-09 18:40 PDT images and data files on the 20us, 2us and 400us they are available for release or posting

[Harvey]

No problem Fuzzy, it is all fully understandable and certainly ok as I am sure this is only a single run of many to come.

Here is a graph of the data for each channel which helps to illustrate why we cannot take just a single cycle and extrapolate it. However, the process is clearly periodic over a fair quantity of cycles, and that is a good thing. It makes it possible to extrapolate the Joules for a 7 hour run

Larger Pic

Also, I have posted a video showing how I derived the calcs:

Excel Primer

I hope you don't mind that when you signed onto Skype, the notification was recorded with your name on it - if this is a problem let me know and I'll pull the video right away.

I've made the video private until I hear back on this.

EDIT: Video Link Is Now Public

[ashtweth]

Guys - some more really good news.

IEEE have informed me that I can resubmit the paper with new revised information and evidence of open source duplication of the experiment provided that they are made fully cogniscant of the data available at the replication.

The implication is clearly that the first was not considered as having sufficient information. So Fuzzy. Would you please allow a collaboration on a new paper including your revised data - that we can submit this for peer review? We're game if you are. I see a comfortable collaboration between all parties here - provided you have no objections to us using your data.In fact I think that many parties could come to the table here - all from our contributors and it would be so nice if you could pm Fuzzy, me, Aaron or Harvey with suggestions or considerations. Just think of it. The first collaborative attempt of a paper submitted by open source enthusiasts. And possibly the first proof of significant energy savings OU OR COP>17. Both are amazing.

HA!!!!!!! YES YES YES ROSE for president!!! Sorry guys i got excitement like when i was 5 years of age there, collective and communal efforts that effect the next generation do this to me, i might need some medication Well with people HERE like in this forum, YOU ALL KNOW YOU ARE!! what do you expect? I HOPE OU FORUM HAS SOUR GRAPES!!! Yep its about time some one said it. Rose all the info is preserved in the open source engineers non profit document, for back up if you need it

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Ros...Technology.pdf

Today i think i might smile for a change Jib Rose do you realize that this on the web site will show other inventors and help the whole cause of cause you do. what an amazing bench of individuals here. This forum has got to stay.

All respect
Ashtweth

[witsend]

Hi Ash So nice to see all that optimism.

Guys. So far - the collaborators. Harvey, Fuzzy, Aaron, Me, DDM, - ?? Any other takers? I could see Groundloop make a contribution here if he's game - in conjunction with some test parameters that I think Harvey needs to consider? And someone to do a simulation? Again, I see Harvey playing a pivotal role in getting the data interpreted and collated? Ash - our editor/cum/monitor of the submitted? And someone to overview the quality and standard of some video presentations?

The test itself will have two in house experimentalist (or three depending on Groundloop's acceptance of this proposal) who can replicate each other's findings - unless that's 'over kill'? And perhaps some small reference to the 'negative preceding positive' if Harvey sees this as relevant.

And just a quick reference to another very important issue. Tektronix' the preferred instrument. Their association with this in conjunction with a submission to the IEEE may thereby gain respectability?? Lisa - I trust you're reading this.

I've finally managed some sleep but may tell you that I've not yet come in to land. I wake up and think I'm still dreaming. This is a sweet moment in my life.

EDIT And here's a 'kick off' for the test object. 'The object of these tests is to determine whether or not energy delivered by an electric energy supply source - results in stored or regenerated energy when interacting with circuit components in series with the supply and when subjected to a switching cycle.' Something like that? Happy to modify this on advisement.

[Groundloop]

@Witsend,

My contribution so far has been using time and money to make PCBs
for the circuit. I guess Luc still has some left?

My time is limited and I can't promise any extensive testing. The Tektronix o-scope is way out of my reach. It costs in excess of 100.000,- NOK.

Alex (Groundloop)

[witsend]

@Witsend,

My contribution so far has been using time and money to make PCBs
for the circuit. I guess Luc still has some left?

My time is limited and I can't promise any extensive testing. The Tektronix o-scope is way out of my reach. It costs in excess of 100.000,- NOK.

Alex (Groundloop)

Hi Alex. Harvey mentioned that you're able to do a critical aspect of the tests. I'm not sure of his objects. But I don't think it requires 'tektronix' equipment. Just some apparatus to check the 'value' of the spike. Probably be resolved with some accurate description of apparatus and some elementary measuring equipment. But I'm out of my league here. In any event - I would not want to impose on your time. And indeed, we're all grateful for your input with regard to the circuits. If you have the time I'm sure it will be appreciated. But I'm probably way too previous in mentioning this at all. Apologies.

[Groundloop]

Rose,

I have a 20MHz two channel O-scope, a 20MHz frequency counter, a 1300MHz
spectrum analyzer and some DVMs.

So if this is enough to do some testing for Harvey, just let me know.
(No need to apologies, I will chip in and help in any way I can.)

Alex.

[witsend]

And Fuzzy. I've thanked you - copiously - but would like to put this on record. I have faced a rather arduous 4 months or so - of hoping to see a replication - doubting my own representations in this regard - and generally and quite frankly - I was systematically giving up hope.

You are amazing. One just needs to evaluate the efforts you are prepared to go to when seeing your willingness to travel 600 odd miles to access Aaron's Tektronix. Then - as if that wasn't enough you then proceded to evaluate the circuit with a proficiency and expertise that leaves us all with our mouths open. And then to actually find that elusive moment - which entirely eluded everyone.

You made reference to me about the movie the 'Medicine Man'? I think it was. There's a very real parallel here. We seemed to have lost the 'moment'. So thank God you were there and thank God you found it. Who knows how long it would otherwise have stayed hidden. Again had you not been so perfectly attuned to the requirements of these experiments and its objects - who knows how long it would be before this was again found.

So. For the record. You have managed to vindicate our claim (which is good) and salvaged a real advantage for our poor abused planet - with its ever pressing needs for cleaner and greener - (which is infinitely better).

Thank you Fuzzy. And thank you. It cannot be said often enough. You are truly amazing. Historically your efforts here must always be a primary reference.

[witsend]

Rose,

I have a 20MHz two channel O-scope, a 20MHz frequency counter, a 1300MHz
spectrum analyzer and some DVMs.

So if this is enough to do some testing for Harvey, just let me know.
(No need to apologies, I will chip in and help in any way I can.)

Alex.

Many many thanks indeed Alex. This is a really good thing. I'm sure Harvey will get in touch with you.

[witsend]

Finessing The Ace

Hi Aaron,

While I'm on this long gratitude list - an overdue thank you to the trump player in this exercise. Thank you Aaron for all your hard work here - for finding the obscure blog posting and for rallying the talents to get this evaluated.

I'm fully congnisant of the extraordinary time you've spent on this exercise - the shear volume of hours and effort - and your seriously aggressive protection of these claims. And this in the face of an attack that has got to be at an unprecedented scale on these forums. You were so equal to the task. And your unfolding of the negative wattage value was a first in every sense of the word. That was the ace you played and it was also our first good news.

Thanks Aaron. For everything. Words fail. Definitely the Ace.

So,

[witsend]

Our heavy weight

And Harvey - last but not least. I hardly know where to start. There's some irony in the truth that it was probably thanks to TK's noisy disclaimers that first caught your attentions here. And thank goodness you found us. We are truly indebted to the 'heavy weight' analysis, the skills in the art - the guidance in the testing - the patience in teaching - and on and on.

And may I add that on a personal level I have learned more from you than any other living soul - on the subject that I love best - which is science. The time you have spent on this is deeply appreciated. I just hope it wasn't also too taxing on your time.

And at least some tribute to your deep understanding of things. Clearly a wise man Harvey. And an enormous asset to our efforts - not least of which is in simply tolerating our own rather excitable and eccentric passions. But when it comes to the dream of and the means of unfolding our shared hopes for clean energy - you are definitely our authority. Truly proud to be on the same team.

Many thanks for everything Harvey.

[Harvey]

Thank you Rosemary for all those kind words. I am sure there are others present with more authority than I, but they remain quiet. Not to mention that each of the contributors here are authorities in their own area of expertise. So we are on even ground with our respective talents. I am in an uneasy position here of relying on a failing memory, old books and a credentialed son with other things on his mind, to help me double check my analyses. It is good that we have MH and Poynt99 to verbalize their views and keep me triple checking.

In an effort to superficially resolve the current phasing relative to the voltage, I erringly shifted the current midpoint between the HV spikes and was certain the results were just nonsense. Later, in graphing a single spike, and paying a little better attention to it, I realized my mistake. I was shifting the current 90° withing the burst band, not the cycle. The cycle is quite narrow in the data, with the pulse taking only 5 rows. I find myself agreeing here with MH that I need better resolution if I would calculate the phase shift, but we would need enough samples to include the harmonic periodicity shown in my last posted graphs.

The good news, is that when I properly shifted the current 90° (and I doubt the phase shift is more than that) I get 165.783W average dissipation in the load. This may change quite a bit when I go back and get more resolution. I still need to do the analysis on the others that have more samples and fewer cycles.

@Alex,

I need to add here, that your work on the PCB's played a pivotal role in encouraging others to participate, and I for one truly admire the initiative you took to engineer them. Regarding my prior post to replace the load resistor with a pure inductor, diode with parallel incandescent, we should look at the Coss of the HEXFET. This Document can aid in understanding this. I know that .99 already has a very good comprehension of this as he has modeled the FET with just those capacitors already. The Coss , or Output Capacitance is what the inductor sees in series when the FET is off and helps to determine the resonant frequency. The IRFPG50 is 250pF. The resonant mode sets our pulse width, or more appropriately, the energy volume contained inside the pulse. A wide pulse, with short amplitude can have the same energy volume as a narrow pulse with high amplitude. We want the narrow pulse with the high amplitude (as long as we stay under 1KV - we can exceed that some of the time, but we should stay below it). The total energy volume is really determined by the energy stored in the inductor during the on-time. A given inductor can only store so much in it's field and then it becomes saturated. Increasing the on-time beyond that serves no purpose except to waste energy. When all of the energy is fully dissipated (hopefully in our incandescent) then the cycle can continue. So the dissipation time is our off-time. When the on-time and off-time are tuned to the natural resonance of the circuit, then we will attain to optimum performance from a classical POV. This setup should also be amenable to Rosemary's regenerative theory which would manifest here as extra energy during the dissipation period. A simple photometer or light meter can be used to determine how the incandescent compares to another operating at a known value. Our eyes are actually pretty accurate light meters, but they don't have a good numerical conversion But I assure you, if you have a 150W incandescent running on 6W (dark) and another averaging 165W your eyes will definitely notice the difference .

We may have to make the inductor by hand, and there will be some interaction with the incandescent inductance. A fast 1500PIV diode on the feed in side would be desired.

Why this test? To see if the effect can be reproduced without the use of resistive wire in the primary inductor. If so, then we can open up more opportunities for application of the effect.

Cheers,

[Groundloop]

Harvey,

I will look into your proposed circuit this weekend and see what I can do.

Alex.

[witsend]

And while I'm on a roll - let me at least add a thank you to the kind offices of two of our erstwhile resident trolls.

I'll start with TK and his boisterous march through three forums and many more threads - trumpeting on as he did. He lost his plausibility when he - in turn - was hounded by a drunken relative. But even with this handicap Wilbyinebriated outranked and outwitted him. And all TK managed was to draw a great deal more attention to the claim than it would probably otherwise have managed. Then he disappeared. So strange.

Then there's MileHigh - whose compulsive need to guide is also only matched by a compulsive need to misdirect. He only resolves this conflict when he manages both. Then he indulges in a welter of posts to hide his delight at the ground zero catastrophes he thereby manages.

The gratitude to both is for what they've taught us. TK taught us to never to trust a troll. MH teaches us why we should never trust a troll.

edit Apologies to serious readers for the apparent irrelevance and irreverance in this post.
2nd edit. Harvey has rather rudely advised me that 'I'm not so much on a roll as on a 'troll''

[Harvey]

While looking for an envelope value that can be used for extrapolation (which seems to be 134.4µs in the 40µs/div data), I see that the visual presented shows a triple harmonic that is not present in the data.

At first glance, it looks like periodic sets, but at closer examination it can be seen that distance between harmonics is widening as time progresses. It concerns me that this information is not included in the data, as it is my understanding that the visuals (scope shots) are generated by the scope digitally.

Perhaps those are artifacts caused by image compression during the upload to the internet?

If they are real, and not in our data, it may interfere with being able to extrapolate over long periods as I said could be done for the 7 hour run. Also, we wouldn't know mathematically if they impact our calculations in a positive or negative way.

I'll see if I can grab the scope shot and point out what I am referring to here.

Larger Pic