Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[Farmhand]

There is something odd about the output current measurement in this video.

At about 5:50 minutes he reads 43 amps from the neutral line, if the voltage was
120v then that would be 5160 Watts, so the voltage must be less.

OK so 2000 watts divided by 43 amps equals 46 volts across the load.
If the 2000 Watt load had 120 volts across it it would read more like 16.6 amps.

Why not just measure the volts across the lamps ? It would be more accurate and useful info.

MECCALTE IMPERIAL RUN 2 - YouTube

The input measures 71 amps at 31 volts so 2200 Watts.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Low side current measurement. Page 8.

http://www.diodes.com/_files/product...zetex/an39.pdf

That's a handy reference Matt.

I'm trying to make sense of UFO's measurements but, it's not clear to me
what is measured where and when and the actual circuit layout.

With respect to actual over C.O.P. > 1 or OU claims ( not so much r&d stuff).
I think we should expect at the least a basic diagram showing the circuit
(could be a block diagram even in some cases) with the measurement points,
what was measured where and in what sequence, all together, or one after
another. Or this was measured then that was connected then "that" was
measured ect. And scope shots to show the input / output wave shapes at the
measurement points, ( I think that is one of the most important things ).

Cheers

[dR-Green]

Hi dR-Green,

Now I understand what you are saying. In my lack of knowledge about audio systems I did not know they used the term PWM.

Sound/synthesis is all about waves/waveforms. The old analogue synths are nothing but voltage controlled oscillators, filters, amplifiers etc. Everything is set by variable resistors and capacitors and switches, it's just a collection of different electronic parts - a source signal is fed through various processors/modules to "shape" the sound and affect the output waveform, hence "modular" synthesis. It just so happens they're designed for the audio frequency range, but otherwise it's all exactly the same thing. They're basically very nice custom waveform signal generators. In the demo video I'm just using a software equivalent and using only the basic oscillator. If you were to connect a scope to your sound output and play the video you would see the same signal as is shown, increase the frequency and we're back in the familiar territory of this forum.

[citfta]

You're Right!!

Hey Matt,

You must be right. I have damaged my few remaining brain cells. I must have, because I read the info about using clamp meters, (which I have used hundreds of times) and I couldn't find a single reference in that info about there being any difference between measuring the low side or the high side. Actually I read the whole thing 3 times and still didn't see anything about that. The only thing even close is a tip about reading DC that said the way you clamp around the wire can give you a positive or negative reading. Oh wait maybe it is my eyesight that is going. I just got new glasses. Maybe I can get a refund on them. Oh well I think I'll sign up for a brain transplant. That might do the trick.

Later,
Carroll

PS: Remind me sometime to tell you about the so called engineer I had to work with for a few days. He clamped the 3000 amp clamp-on ammeter around the outside of a 2 inch piece of sealtight and pegged the meter. Then the sealtight started smoking. Another over educated idiot.

[citfta]

Thanks

Hi dR-Green,

Now I understand what you are saying. In my lack of knowledge about audio systems I did not know they used the term PWM. Thanks for telling me about something else I didn't know about. I agree with what you said then. If you are not actually changing the pulse width then it of course is not really PWM only PW.

It seems there are a lot of terms used on this forum and others that are not really understood by the people using them. They probably understand what they mean to say but don't use the term or terms the way they are normally used by people familiar with those terms.

Please feel free to use this thread for any other terms you would like to help clarify.

Thanks,
Carroll

[dR-Green]

Hi dR-Green

I am not exactly sure what you were saying in your post. Are you saying we should not call a PWM a PWM unless we modulate the pulses?

In industrial use a PWM is normally constantly changing the pulse width to control the motor. As the motor is loaded the pulse width is increased to maintain the speed of the motor. Or if the operator asks for a different speed then the motor controller will adjust the pulse width to reach the new speed. So you see the pulse width is being constantly adjusted by the motor control circuit so in effect it is modulating the pulse width. I believe that is why they are called PWMs.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Well it depends how specific you want to get I suppose, but to audio people PWM refers to a very specific thing and then conveniently everyone knows exactly what the other guy is talking about with this simple phrase based on the physics of what's happening. The "option" to manually adjust the pulse width of a square wave is another thing. If you were to say "use PWM" then an LFO (or some source of modulation) would be applied to the PW, because that's the definition of it. If you don't want a different result to what you have in mind then you don't ask the audio engineer for PWM.

What I'm referring to here is that in a certain thread the term PWM is thrown about as if something specific is being referred to, but there is no modulation whatsoever, they are actually referring to a basic square wave with fixed PW. It's not adjusting itself in any way and there's no modulation.

[Matthew Jones]

Low side current measurement. Page 8.

http://www.diodes.com/_files/products_appnote_pdfs/zetex/an39.pdf

[Ufopolitics]

Answer Included here.

Ok I will admit occasionally my curiosity will get the better of me and I will look at the last couple of posts in the assymetrical motor thread. So I was just checking to see if anyone has actually had any great success with their motors when I found this statement in a post from Ufo.

Quote:

I have been measuring Amperage on NEGATIVE POLE OF BATTERY....AND THAT IS VERY WRONG!!!...

NEVER, EVER, DC AMPERAGE GETS MEASURED ON THE NEGATIVE SIDE POLE OF LOAD...AS THIS CURRENT...IS...NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS...THAN THE MANIFESTED CURRENT BACK TO BATTERY FROM MY MACHINE (THE EXCESS, THE RESIDUAL)...SINCE...CURRENT "MANIFESTS"...NEVER TRAVELS LIKE VOLTAGE DOES...WELL, IT MANIFESTS AS INPUT AS MY MOTOR REQUEST IT ONLY AT POSITIVE TERMINAL OF BATTERIES...NEVER AT NEGATIVE!!

And of course...it results in a different readout..than the one I was measuring all this time...so...all tests thrown out to garbage can...Let's start again fresh...from the beginning...

But that is the way experiments and testing goes...as I really did not have that concept clear either...up to now...

End of quote.

Now I am confused. Does anyone understand what Ufo is saying? I think he is trying to say that the current on the negative side of the load is not the same as the current on the positive side of the load. If that is what he is saying then that goes against what I have been taught and more importantly very much against what I have seen in real life. Has anyone ever seen a system where the current leaving a source is any different than the current going back to the source? Now I have seen situations where the meters didn't always tell the truth, especially with pulsing and quick short duration pulses. But the meters still showed the same whether measuring the positive or negative side of the load.

If anyone has actually seen anything different would you please share with us and tell us about what kind of system or circuit you have.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Measuring Tip & Glossary - KYORITSU

[Matthew Jones]

.....Now I am confused. Does anyone understand what Ufo is saying? .....
Respectfully,
Carroll

!!!Warning!!!

Contemplating "Putts Babble" may cause serious and prolonged permanent damage to the cerebral cortex. And in some cases has caused sudden Mental impairment that might prevent you from operating heavy equipment and/or vehicles. In some cases Death was a side effect, in controlled studies, for those who were already impaired from mental illness and/or Mental retardation.

[citfta]

PW or PWM

Hi dR-Green

I am not exactly sure what you were saying in your post. Are you saying we should not call a PWM a PWM unless we modulate the pulses?

In industrial use a PWM is normally constantly changing the pulse width to control the motor. As the motor is loaded the pulse width is increased to maintain the speed of the motor. Or if the operator asks for a different speed then the motor controller will adjust the pulse width to reach the new speed. So you see the pulse width is being constantly adjusted by the motor control circuit so in effect it is modulating the pulse width. I believe that is why they are called PWMs.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[citfta]

What??

Ok I will admit occasionally my curiosity will get the better of me and I will look at the last couple of posts in the assymetrical motor thread. So I was just checking to see if anyone has actually had any great success with their motors when I found this statement in a post from Ufo.

Quote:

I have been measuring Amperage on NEGATIVE POLE OF BATTERY....AND THAT IS VERY WRONG!!!...

NEVER, EVER, DC AMPERAGE GETS MEASURED ON THE NEGATIVE SIDE POLE OF LOAD...AS THIS CURRENT...IS...NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS...THAN THE MANIFESTED CURRENT BACK TO BATTERY FROM MY MACHINE (THE EXCESS, THE RESIDUAL)...SINCE...CURRENT "MANIFESTS"...NEVER TRAVELS LIKE VOLTAGE DOES...WELL, IT MANIFESTS AS INPUT AS MY MOTOR REQUEST IT ONLY AT POSITIVE TERMINAL OF BATTERIES...NEVER AT NEGATIVE!!

And of course...it results in a different readout..than the one I was measuring all this time...so...all tests thrown out to garbage can...Let's start again fresh...from the beginning...

But that is the way experiments and testing goes...as I really did not have that concept clear either...up to now...

End of quote.

Now I am confused. Does anyone understand what Ufo is saying? I think he is trying to say that the current on the negative side of the load is not the same as the current on the positive side of the load. If that is what he is saying then that goes against what I have been taught and more importantly very much against what I have seen in real life. Has anyone ever seen a system where the current leaving a source is any different than the current going back to the source? Now I have seen situations where the meters didn't always tell the truth, especially with pulsing and quick short duration pulses. But the meters still showed the same whether measuring the positive or negative side of the load.

If anyone has actually seen anything different would you please share with us and tell us about what kind of system or circuit you have.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[dR-Green]

PW Vs. PWM

Today we have the good fortune of being able to study PW and PWM in action. In the demonstration setup we have an oscillator producing a square waveform in the audio frequency range, which is given a fixed Pulse Width, duty cycle, or symmetry, in relation to "time" set by the user. The demonstration begins with 50%, the PW knob is turned manually, and the effect is seen on the scope.

Lo and behold, we have PW control, a variable but continuous duty cycle with respect to "time". This may be modulated by hand and therefore by definition would be PWM. However, in application, given the fixed PW and the fact we do not intend to modulate it by hand all day long, it may NOT be called PWM. This is a basic continuous signal, unvarying over time.

We now assign a low frequency oscillator (LFO) to Oscillator 1 symmetry, intensity is set to 100%. With an LFO start frequency of 0.12 cycles/sec already a difference can be seen on the scope and heard through the speakers. The square waveform is no longer continuous over time, the pulse width is being varied at a rate of 0.12 cycles/sec. LFO frequency is increased to maximum of 32 cycles/sec and then brought back down. This situation may go on indefinitely at any frequency requiring no user intervention, the pulse width is continuously being modulated, and is therefore referred to as PWM.

In conclusion, PW and PWM is NOT the same thing.

PW Vs. PWM - YouTube

[Farmhand]

Here's a setup I came up with a while back, it's hilarious, but it was also very
efficient, the main heat loss was in the mosfet which was not working properly
and acting more as a resistance than anything. The motor also made some
warm. It was self adjusting in a few ways, pretty simple and useful, the motor
could be loaded up pretty hard. Not long after making that video i got it to run
with capacitors in place of the two series batteries. Now that I can use picaxe
the possibilities are many. All it does is use the transformer to maintain an equilibrium.

I do say small "drain" not "gain", my speech is not very clear.

Watching the video should at least give a laugh, at my attempt to explain it if nothing else.

Switchback Drive.wmv - YouTube

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Hi Matt, Actually I think the theory I came up with is more or less your theory.
After reading the explanation you gave I think you said a very similar thing.
So I can't claim it is my "theory", just that it is the theory I see as likely.
It may not seem like it but I have a lot of respect for you Matt. you're a doer and
you speak your mind, which can only be a good thing. I accept Duncan's
apology, I can put things behind me, and I do understand that there could be
some bias against me, and maybe I should expect that. I don't think Duncan is
a bad guy but I also don't think he has any right to make so many personal
assumptions about me, none of this is about "me" as such, it's about the
technologies. I say something that to me at least makes sense, and he
attacks me personally, in a very insulting way, by insinuating or inferring
(not sure of the proper terminology there), that I am some kind of paid
disinforment or something. Which is defamatory. I don't mind being defamed if
facts are used to do it, but the MO appears to be use some catchy words and
dubious claims of OU to to get others on side then turn them against me
personally, so that my credibility is harmed. Then I must waste time and effort
to defend my opinions and my dignity. To me it seems to be a deliberate attempt
to modify my thinking and behavior to what is "acceptable", or suffer the
consequences. I am not an animal to be behavior modified. Two can play that
game. In fact I'm a bit of an animal "Whisperer". I study an animals behaviors
and instincts and desires and use the knowledge to encourage the animal to
do what I want it to, it works best when they are calm and inquisitive and it can
take a lot of time and patience. It can work with people exactly the same
way. People do it to others without even thinking about it. Positive
reinforcement works best unless the total breakdown of the subjects will is
desired. With positive reinforcement the subject feels as though they have
free will and they do. But with negative reinforcement the subject feels
disciplined and is.

I'm not attempting to create a reaction free posting environment for myself either

I'll be the first to admit that everything I write is not correct, I make mistakes.

I agree those little spikes don't have much power, but who knows the entire
effects of the instantaneous current spikes.

As far as the battery bounce back is concerned, i'm not saying that is the
cause of anything, just that the effect is real and it should be considered
as a part of the process, if it is good or bad is another matter, It may be
possible that the bounce back effect can be used in an advantageous way.
Actually I should say it cannot be bad, it can only just "be" or be useful or not.

The motor I used is a low rpm high torque motor from a printer head drive.
It has 40 Ohms DC resistance, it didn't get very hot, or even warm but I didn't
run it for long.

One thing is for sure this is a very good way to get some initial charge into a
battery with very low discharged voltage, like 1 or 2 volts, a regular charger
will not even look at them and a Bedini type charger can fire up all neons
because of the too high resitance unless very low power is used for a while to
start.. My battery looks like it might rejuvenate but there is the chance it will
fail during the restoration and give me a dead battery. I do have a commercial
charger with a "refresh" function that will deal with these very low voltage
drained batteries, but it takes a long time, it's very gentle (at first).

I had to go back to another project last night to collect some wave forms.
But I will run the system tonight again for longer, however the battery is
already holding 8 volts, I was sure it would have at least one bad cell, but it
doesn't seem so.

One thing I did consider is that there may be a transmutation of some element
within the bad battery that may produce energy from matter under certain
conditions. This could produce a cooling effect maybe, not exactly sure. But
I'm no chemist, but I think if matter gives up energy it causes cooling, but
that is an assumption.

The system can be split in two sides, supply and load sides. The two series
batteries are the supply side and the load is the motor, the third battery and
whatever else is placed on that side as a load.

The third battery is charged directly by the series batteries through the motor
the difference in the voltage split depends on a few factors. But the motor
and the third battery comprise a series load. Any current through the motor is
the same as the current through the third battery, the energy dissipated by
each element is indicated by the voltage drop across the element, there is
not current used twice as it appears, current is current the energy dissipated
or power consumed is calculated by the voltage drop multiplied by the
current. The current alone represents no power or energy as I understand it,
to get power the voltage causing the current needs to be considered.

My point is that 1 amp can flow through both the third battery and the motor.
If either element has zero voltage across it then no power is consumed in that
element. There could be 1000 amps flowing through a circuit element but if
there is no voltage drop across the element then no power is consumed.
Current does not get consumed, power does, energy is dissipated and charge is depleted.

Any return of energy from the motor to the supply would make sense to me as
being reactive power, (unused power from the supply being returned to the
supply).

This is really no different from a regular load. It's just that a load such as a
"dead" battery contains "releasable" energy, which can be released and
increase the power and active energy of the circuit, but I think any increased
active energy seen in the circuit was released from the bad battery.

Until some other rational explanation is given I'll go with that.

The process appears to release previously "locked in energy" from the bad
battery and so can increase the active energy in the circuit.

The main point to remember is that the energy in the bad battery was put
there by people, when it was made or when it was initially charged.

However that is not to say that the process could not be used to advantage.

I think if we consider all these things then we can get a clearer picture.

The term using current twice make no sense, in this setup the same current
flows through two loads, current is a continuous loop. Using that thinking if I
take a series string of 100 LEDs then the current is used 100 times.

One thing I can say for sure is the voltage drop is only utilized once.

It would seem there is some over complication of things.

Cheers

[Matthew Jones]

Here's m first look at the current through the 0.1 Ohm resistor and the
voltage of the bad battery or (battery number 3), If I'm not mistaken I see
current spikes of up to 6 amps with a resulting bump in the battery 3 voltage.

Three battery test - YouTube

It stands to reason to me that if the system has reached an equilibrium between
the motor and the battery 3, "which it does" by splitting the total applied
voltage of the two supply batteries between the motor and the battery 3,
then because an equilibrium is already reached then any resulting spikes which
increase the voltage of the battery 3 suddenly would cause a voltage across
the motor and battery 3 that is greater than the voltage across the two
supply batteries, thus causing a reverse emf to the supply and charge them
momentarily, kinda like a self desulfator circuit does, it takes energy in from
the supply then with that it produces a reverse emf to be applied to the
battery. Logic tells me that if the motor and the battery 3 have an equal
voltage across them to the voltage across the supply batteries, if then all of
a sudden there is a voltage spike that causes the voltage across the motor
and battery 3 to exceed the voltage across the two supply batteries current
will be caused to flow into the supply batteries, this could be thought of as
reactive power or just a transient reverse emf.

I still think that is what is happening.

Cheers

Duncan apologized why can we not consolidate.

Do you have alot of heat in your Motor? Don't think if was a bounce back from the battery your motor would slow down and heat up?

At first I felt that might be the cause but from seeing Davids results now several times I feel its more than just a little spike going back to the primary on the.

Either way come post you stuff on the thread incase you get lucky and can add some wood the fire.
Matt