[NewCandle] Ron Stiffler thread

[Dr Stiffler]

Hi All,

So Nick is still (avramenko) pluggin' away at the Stiffler circuit. Not
sure how you are characterizing POut, but I presume you mean
that the output power to the LED's is matching the input power
from the driver. What is the efficiency of the LED's in their
conversion to light with the rectified RF vs DC?

BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, Ron hisself seems to
have signed up with the list a few weeks ago. So perhaps we
can hear directly from him about the status of his work now
and whether any of the earlier claims still stand.

I think that one could take this basic idea, combine it with
a couple of ham tricks, and have a clever little product.
Basically it would be a LED light that runs off the local
radio stations. Now I know this is not Ron's claim, so
I leave all the OU part to him and Jones and claim the former
for myself (grin). 

K. 


**************
Because this group appears more level headed than others :-) I will be happy to state the current work on my SEC circuits.

After six different calorimetric runs (yes in a unit not near close to the EarthTech MOAC) I have consistently shown Heat gains ranging from a low 1.7 to as high as 3.8. The variations that come into play have been found to be the heating of the circuit itself. My calorimeter uses a reference 500mL of water in a standing heat exchanger setup. This allows the cell in which the circuit is mounted to reach some high temperatures which is detuning the exciter by changing the Base (LC) capacitor, the transistor curve and the diodes themselves. There was first thought to be a problem with the water being involved in a phase change and vapor pressure changes. These things were accounted for with the help of a thermodynamics's Ph.D.

My unit is now calibrated and runs are correlating properly over continued runs. A typical run will involve the circuit being placed in the unit and sealed and insulated. The heat exchanger is filled with 500mL of distilled, deionized water and sealed. A resistor is heated with a know voltage and current for a period (now) of some six hours while monitoring the ambient temp. Ta, the cell temp. (the area where the resistor and circuit are sealed) Tc and the Water temp. Tw. Calculation is made to adjust for internal mass and properties of the containment vessels (etc). This is the offset used in bring the calibration run to 1.00. The unit disconnected and let stand until it reaches environmental equilibrium. At this point the circuit under test is powered and the whole monitoring process starts over. The circuit will in the first three hours show a gain of from 2.66 to 3.8 and will begin to decline from there. Once equilibrium is reached the test stops and the data is run. The longest run was for 19 hours and the output dropped to 0.8991, the current also dropped from it mean by a 30% value, indicating tuning was lost.

I maintain little doubt that these tests are in error to a point of invalidating a gain >1.0, yet the test to prove it without a doubt will require a heat exchange method like EarthTech's MOAC. In this way the circuit will be able to retain tuning in the optimum range.

The Pin is monitored across a 1ohm series resistor into an A/D converter with 12 bit resolution. The power to the unit is filtered through a multi pole low pass filter using quality stepped capacitor values and RF ferrite's. The sample rate is 10kHz and samples are taken every (1) minute. This same A/D unit reads the input voltage and the two precision Fairchild temperature sensors. The input voltage is 24V and is input to the A/D unit via a 10:1 divider (50K+5K). The Temperature sensors are calibrated against NIST Standard and are calibrated at 25'C, which provides for a +/- 1'C over a 100'C range.

This is it, you ask and I supplied an answer, receive it as you will.

BTW I have stopped all postings, made exception here. Find it to be greatly counter productive.

Thanks...

RRS