COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[witsend]

Harvey,

Thank you for finding the detailed specifications on the IRFPG50. The information sounds so important, that I'll bet other researchers would find it valuable to have, as well. Would you be so kind as to scan the entire citation from your 1993 IR Designer's Manual on this device and post it to this thread? I know I would download it!

Understanding this resonant window makes Rosemary's claims seem more achievable than ever.

Thanks again for your research and your insights.

Peter

Peter, I entirely missed this post. Please give me the post number. WOW. That's the first time I've read something that I can fully identify with. if you're around please give me a post number here.

EDIT OK Just seen this. Thanks Harvey. You've precisely described the effect. Many thanks indeed. And I'm reasonably certain TK knows this as well - and probably already fully tested the effects.

[witsend]

Hello Rosemary and all,

I rarely dig deeply into things that TK is involved with because a great majority of his efforts are directed towards explaining fringe science by classical means. When he invested so much effort into this it really piqued my curiosity, because normally he can zero in on the root of the matter rather quickly. His hand waving about lost scope triggers did not set well with me and I had to go and read the Quantum article and the Newspaper article and have a gander at the patent application as well.

When I saw that schematic I knew I had seen it before; at least the HEXFET arrangement with the inductive load. I knew that TK was using his own flavor of MOSFET and that can have varied results. So...digging back into my International Rectifier Designers Manual (HDM-3 September 1993) for HEXFET's I had a concerted look at the IRFPG50. One of the features of that particular item is that it is 'Repetitive Avalanche Rated'. It is specifically designed to handle the voltage spike generated during and inductive field collapse to the tune of 800mJ for a single pulse and 19mJ for repetitive pulses (depending on junction temperature).

Looking at the battery as an inductive-capacitor and the load as an inductive-resistor we can see that the source impedance of the battery will have a reactance as will the load. When these two items are tuned a certain way, we can expect a resonance to occur. When this happens (according to the documentation at 143KHz), the current through the load is AC and the EMF is converted to heat while the current moves in both directions, multiple times, while the ringing subsides. This condition can be exacerbated by the Avalanche characteristics of the IRFPG50, where additional current may initially flow subsequent to the off state of the device, which enlarges the magnetic field just prior to collapse.

One can see that this works similarly to a water-hammer in plumbing where the flow of water is suddenly stopped and the energy cascades back to the source and resonates between the source and the shutoff device until it is fully dissipated.

Replicators, including TK, need to focus on the 143KHz secondary oscillation and how it plays a part in the documented results.

Best Regards,

Harvey

I'm just taking the liberty of reposting this because it is really important. It should put it at the top of every page of this thread. Please all replicators of this test - read this through. And yet again. Thank you Harvey. Where were you while we were ploughing through this. And I hope you'll be around to guide us from here on. Many many thanks indeed.

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, hi Rosemary, So is the avalanche effect intrinsic to the mosfet or is it the diode that allows this to occur. I'm using an NTE392 npn bipolar and all the specs mention are unclamped inductive load handling about 90mj though i would assume it doesnt allow avalanche to occur. still though I am getting extra heating but maybe not what I could with a transistor like that. What are your thoughts folks. any ideas about this Rosemary, thanks.
peace love light

[witsend]

Hi folks, hi Rosemary, So is the avalanche effect intrinsic to the mosfet or is it the diode that allows this to occur. I'm using an NTE392 npn bipolar and all the specs mention are unclamped inductive load handling about 90mj though i would assume it doesnt allow avalanche to occur. still though I am getting extra heating but maybe not what I could with a transistor like that. What are your thoughts folks. any ideas about this Rosemary, thanks.
peace love light

SkyWatcher - I see your posts, so regularly and so appreciated. I'm not sure if you're testing our actual circuit. Everyone seems to have their own. But if it's ours, we've found that resonance using every possible MOSFET type. But where Harvey has hit on this is that that IRPG50 probably gives us the best effect.

The point is that some level of resonance should be achievable - regardless. But you need to find the 'sweet spot' by playing around with duty cycles. I think Aaron will explain the resonance more clearly later today, tomorrow, tonight. We've got some complex time zones at play here. In any event. We usually sweep through the duty cycle until we see it. But note what Harvey said about the complexities of measurement are key. It's the need to compute the returning energy and that needs some specialised scopes. Can you access these?

[SkyWatcher]

Hi Rosemary, well I use to know a guy that was an electronics whiz, he built sound studios and various things, too bad he moved to Arizona. I would not look to me for high tech gizmo's to help confirm this, you know with the empires ink paper monetary system crashing and all, but I will do what i can to help with cheap stuff like digital thermometers, though that wont help much for determining input energy. I think people seeing that you can get more heat with the flyback diode just using an inductive resistor should encourage more experiments. Though as some have said we can't prove anything to anyone, only the self can prove to the self.
peace love light
edit: Oh yes it is almost the same experiment except for using an npn bipolar transistor, well 2 actually in darlington config.
I wonder if a PC type oscilloscope software program might work to see the waveform.

[witsend]

Maybe Aaron or someone can set up a system of testing that is OK'ish - with battery draw down rates or somesuch? Or perhaps we can persuade Peter to put his oar in here. It should be possible. And all input so much appreciated.

[witsend]

following from MileHigh

You guys are presenting a third option so to speak. You have Rosemary's explanation, the classicist explanation, and now your option.
Hardly a 3rd option here. Just a technical commentary showing the enabling of the oscillation.

By definition the current could never exceed the maximum current of approximately (24/12.25) = 1.96 amps.
With respect. Even the classicists evaluate current based on voltage. Are you suggesting that an extreme spike cannot in fact have a current flow commensurate with that voltage?

Also, it's not as simple as i = V/R because when the MOSFET first switches on the initial current is zero, as shown in Aaron and TK's video clips, as per how an inductor works.
I have never found current flow to be zero. Again a difficult statement to understand. Perhaps I'm being too literal.

I have no intention of debating this stuff with you
Isn't the idea of this thread to promote this debate? What are we discussing here? And surely we're all open to different opinions?

As more test data accumulates the claim of COP 17 for Rosemary's circuit will either be verified or refuted.
Fair comment.

My concern - expressed just about everywhere, sorry for being so boring about this - is that the results are not eventually attributed to measurement errors. We can dance a fandango and come up with results and the entire world can turn around and say the measuring equipment was faulty. It can't be argued. That's why it may be as well to keep some focus on the objects of the test as being designed to prove an hypothesis.

[Aaron]

IRFPG50 Datasheet & Harvey's Post

With Harvey's second post added - plus datasheet link here at top.

IRFPG 50 Datasheet



Originally Posted by Harvey
Hello Rosemary and all,

I rarely dig deeply into things that TK is involved with because a great majority of his efforts are directed towards explaining fringe science by classical means. When he invested so much effort into this it really piqued my curiosity, because normally he can zero in on the root of the matter rather quickly. His hand waving about lost scope triggers did not set well with me and I had to go and read the Quantum article and the Newspaper article and have a gander at the patent application as well.

When I saw that schematic I knew I had seen it before; at least the HEXFET arrangement with the inductive load. I knew that TK was using his own flavor of MOSFET and that can have varied results. So...digging back into my International Rectifier Designers Manual (HDM-3 September 1993) for HEXFET's I had a concerted look at the IRFPG50.

One of the features of that particular item is that it is 'Repetitive Avalanche Rated'. It is specifically designed to handle the voltage spike generated during and inductive field collapse to the tune of 800mJ for a single pulse and 19mJ for repetitive pulses (depending on junction temperature).

Looking at the battery as an inductive-capacitor and the load as an inductive-resistor we can see that the source impedance of the battery will have a reactance as will the load. When these two items are tuned a certain way, we can expect a resonance to occur. When this happens (according to the documentation at 143KHz), the current through the load is AC and the EMF is converted to heat while the current moves in both directions, multiple times, while the ringing subsides. This condition can be exacerbated by the Avalanche characteristics of the IRFPG50, where additional current may initially flow subsequent to the off state of the device, which enlarges the magnetic field just prior to collapse.

One can see that this works similarly to a water-hammer in plumbing where the flow of water is suddenly stopped and the energy cascades back to the source and resonates between the source and the shutoff device until it is fully dissipated.

Replicators, including TK, need to focus on the 143KHz secondary oscillation and how it plays a part in the documented results.

The instantaneous voltage across the load resistor will be the current through that resistor times it's resistance E=I*R. The IRFPG50 has a Rds(on) of 2.0 Ohms. The sense resistor is 0.25 Ohms So the combined resistive circuit (notwithstanding reactances) is 12.25 Ohms. Two series batteries for a total of 24V across 12.25 Ohms is 1.96 Amps. Therefore, you should see 19.59 Volts across the load. The instantaneous power during that condition would be 38.4 Watts.

When the magnetic field collapses both in the battery and in the inductor, the voltage present could spike to over 1000V (The Avalanche Voltage for the IRFPG50) and cause a large current to flow for a very small period of time, but sufficient to enlarge the magnetic fields on the rebound and setup a resonant ringing that produces instantaneous values in excess of those above. When this condition occurs with sufficient frequency such that the ambient cooling of the load is unable to dissipate the thermal energy in the time provided, the load will increase in temperature even though the time slice that produces the heating is very small.

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, this is just a tip for anyone testing this circuit, if your using clip leads for testing make sure the clip lead is good by using continuity check on meter, because my results disappeared because the wire had intermittent connection on the flyback diode, seems those pulses damage these cheap clip lead wires easily. or just make short connects, that would solve any wire issues. The extra heat is back again after replacing the bad wire. For what its worth.
peace love light

[gyula]

GYULA, thanks for the specs, i appreciate the input :-)

i guess my main question was........ how much "oomph" is the flyback worth....in comparison to the "oomph" that created it in the first place?.

ie - not just comaring voltage to voltage....... but total ooomph IN(initial pulse )....to total oomph OUT (the flyback)

an example....... if i send a pulse in.....12V, 100Ma, for say...... 1/10th of s second....... then..i store the flyback in a cap....

now....i could have taken that initial pulse......and used it instead to light a 12v bulb rated at 100mA......and i could have lit that bulb for 1/10th of a second...... if i now take the cap.....and put the bulb across it, how long will it light for?..... 90% of 1/10th of a second?......80% of 1/10th of a second?

Hi David,

Unfortunately the only correct answer I can give to your above question is to find a practical setup and test it (using NOT a bulb for the load but a pure resistor, bulbs are nonlinear resistors and further complicate the life of innocent experimenters..., lol). I have not done such comparison in practice you describe.

What I presently think is that in your hypotetical example, the bulb will light for about 90% of the 1/10th of a second, I hope I am not much mistaken...

(Actually, what have you done in your example above? You converted battery energy or a power supply energy into magnetic energy by switching, and you captured the magnetic energy in a capacitor and you have received electrical energy stored in the cap. The very moment you wish to use this stored energy in a load like a bulb or a resistor, then in my present understanding, in your example setup you are allowed to use about the 90% of the energy you have taken out before from the battery by the switching.)


I have found a good paper on pulse power by Kanarev, see here:
Pulse Power

and also a good link on pulse power calculation (in connection of radar but this is not a problem here):
Pulse energy content

If you try to digest those few pages, you will have a better look into the real energy content of pulses.

Rgds, Gyula

[Peter Lindemann]

Aaron's Set-up

Maybe Aaron or someone can set up a system of testing that is OK'ish - with battery draw down rates or some such? Or perhaps we can persuade Peter to put his oar in here. It should be possible. And all input so much appreciated.

Rosemary,

Currently, my "oar in the water" here looks like this. Once Aaron gets his test circuit completely set-up, (this is essentially done, already, he's just waiting for the scope to arrive) I'll go over to his house and help him develop the test procedure and data collection. Once Aaron's set-up is actually a "duplicate" of your original, a wide variety of tests can be performed.

Of course, the first test is to replicate your results, to the best of our ability, and report the results of that. The next thing to do is to make sure Aaron gets all the credit for the replication, otherwise he might stop giving me a cold beer when I come over to visit him!

Once the test set-up is working properly, a second one will be built to duplicate the result again, and be used as a "test stand" to run other experiments without dismantling the original replication model. Using the second model, different MOSFETs and other transistors can be put in the circuit and compared for performance. Also, we can try other variations of the energy re-cycling process, including the method that uses the front-end capacitor and/or simpler resonant methods. The other direction to go is to scale the process up to produce "industrially significant" amounts of heat.

It is just a matter of taking things step-by-step.

Peter

PS.. Rosemary, next time you throw me an oar, make it two, so I don't just end up paddling around in circles!

[witsend]

Thank Peter. Sounds really exciting. But what I was asking was what do we do with those who replicate but without storage scopes? Can you sort out test parameters with batteries? Something?

[Aaron]

testing

Hi Rosemary,

There can still be successful replications.

There is a LOT of innovative and brilliant experimenters here and it will be exciting to see all the different variations and hybrids that come out of this. I can see unlimited applications across the board.

Also, with the properties of this mosfet, I think it could take all the joule thief type circuits to light lights, etc... to the next level of efficiency. This is what we all needed to know.

Imhotep, Slayer, Lidmotor, and others can probably show something along those lines pretty quick.

Anyway, as far as your particular circuit, it is only a matter time until all the tuning protocols are locked in solid so someone can go to the bench and make it work on the first try. As long as the concepts in tuning are known, then the type of talented experimenters here can get great success.

I'll definitely say that there are a lot of things in that scope shot that are only visible if zooming way deep into it. In some, there are ringing inside ringing inside ringing. Like a fractal.

Also, there are probably enough people here to get a good feel on the relationship between the duty cycle and frequency for different inductive resistors as well as gate tuning.

Right now, I have about a dozen different inductive resistors.

The physical size of these that I'm running through multiple tests have a physical size from about 8cm long and 1cm diameter up to 27cm long and 3cm in diamter (that one is a monster 10 ohm 200w clarostat with 86uH).

Inductances are from a few uH's up to 86uH for the 10 ohms and up to several hundred uH for the others.

Even with the much larger inductances, yours was 8.64uH, I don't see much of a problem with switching speed on them. Open hollow core, these things have no problems from what I see so far.

I checked the specs on your scope and it appears it is designed to handle very complex wave forms. I'm sure someone with experience there can adress the reality of that. Fluke 199C.

I have put a ferrite rod in some all the way and partially, and it just seems t dampen everything across the board.

Anyway, I've run the short tests of 10~30 minutes to just check the properties of little changes here and there up to 30 hour tests. Basically, I have been runing tests 24 hours a day 7 days a week since I posted my very first video of the SG hybrid oscillator with a resistor in series (until I got my mosfets from Hong Kong.

I'm now using for the first time my batteries that match your exactly. Two 12v 20ah batteries. Mine are sealed gel cells in my lawnmower. They are in perfect shape and I keep them in good shape with my 1AU Universal Bedini charger. There is no better charger in the world to ensure that the batteries are in tip top shape for each test.

I would recommend that everyone read the last several posts you did in the model thread:
Specifially post 32 and up:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...eld-model.html

I think it is important to see your point of view on the current. Especially since your theory predicted what the circuit is doing or is supposed to do. There are VERY FEW people that can say that their idea predicted something that works when they build it... in non-classical theory.

[Aaron]

other mosfets with repetitive avalance capability

There appears to me a whole mess of hexfets that have the Repetitive Avalanche Rating.

Google search for: "repetitive avalanche rated" hexfet

Perhaps someone that is an expert in data sheets can look at the specs on different ones and see if there are any that are truly comparable to the IRFPG50?

Might make it easier to get a lot of replications off the ground. I still think everyone should try the IRFPG50 first but if it is hard to get, then one with at least the same capability should be used instead of any 'ol mosfet.

[Aaron]

Rosemary Ainslie resonant circuit

Diagram to help visualize Harvey's explanation:



Note to everyone: I copyright ALL my drawings, diagrams, etc... because they're my drawings. I don't make claims to owning the material or concept contained in this drawing and many others unless the circuit is my own innovation.