However, I'd prefer to post any comments in reply on the small set of newsgroups where the earlier messages in this thread appeared, including sci.optics since that's the one I follow. I haven't seen your posting on that group (not yet, anyway) and alt.engineering.electical doesn't seem to be in the 12,000 or so groups on Stanford University's nntp server.
Would you want to repost your comments to the original newsgroups if you haven't done so already?-- or want me to copy your email there, with a reply included?
Hi I do not post to the Science Optics group as perhaps I should as I was, before retirement a research scientist. I already post to more groups than I should and while it might be interesting to post there, I would be scalped by my wife if I subscribed to another group.
Feel free to repeat my posts to any group you care to. Just put my tag line on it so that if any one wants to disagree with me they can reach me.
If you are interested in Magnetics or converters, you might be interested in the series I posted in the engineering group on those subjects.
Just check Google for Bushbadee and Magnetics and they will come up.
Those postings include info from the book I wrote on the subject.
I thought the wanlass device quite interesting. I took 2 halves of a c core and fastened them together. Painted it white and drew the flux lines in red.
I do not remember how I came out with second order and higher harmonics canceling out.
It does not seem reasonable to me that they should, But that is what I think I came out with.
I think I still have the cores in my Lag.
Another fraud was the Kook converter. I also blew him off the stage at Cal Tec when he explained his converter.
By moving components around it turned out he had a standard configuration.
He claimed to put the input and output inductors on one core and that the inductance canceled out and there was no ripple current as I remember.
He was right. But his putting his input and output windings on the same core acted like a transformer and any input ripple appeared right on the output directly, do not pass go , do not collect 200 dollars.
That is the problem with these guys. They come up with all these theoretical stuff and in theory you can not reasonable cover all the bases. When you build the device and subject it to real world tests, then you begin to see the problems that you never even thought of.
I was not to impressed with Cal Tec or their graduates. I had one working for me. When he was given some time to experiment, he tried building a converter that I knew they built at Cal tec as a project. I guess he thought I would not know and he could tell me it was his design. Well at Cal tec they use 1 or 3 amp power supplies with current limiting so the things did not blow out.
We had 30 volt 100 amp supplies and no current limiting beyond a circuit breaker.
The design could not possible work because there was no way to shut the pass transistor off, but he did not realize this and he took out about 6, $100 transistors we needed on the Minute man program. before he came to me and told me he had a problem.
We used to get our prints on 12 to 15 foot long by 6 foot wide sheets of paper and you had to cut them up .
I asked him to get me the schematic for something and he came back with the print rolled up (10 pages worth). I asked him to cut the pages up and he told me he did not go to cal tec to cut out paper dolls. I cut it myself and canned him. He went back to Cal Tec for his Masters degree.
I should have called my buddy there, Dr. Middlebrook, and told him to expect the guy.
Ah such is life in the fast lane.
There is a better way to limit the chargeing to a capacitor. I hold the patents on a Flouresent light ballast that can dim the light from full on to a mild glow. It would work great for limiting the chargeing current of a capacitor bank.
The whole ballast only has about 17 parts and is quite cheap to manufacture.
. . I DO NOT FOLLOW MANY OF THESE NEWS GROUPS To answere me address mail to snipped-for-privacy@aol.com