Pitfalls from Spiky Waveforms: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| published = 2003 | | published = 2003 | ||
| journal = [[Electric Spacecraft Journal]] | | journal = [[Electric Spacecraft Journal]] | ||
| number = | | number = 36 | ||
| pages = 25-27 | | pages = 25-27 | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 09:33, 21 July 2026
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Pitfalls from Spiky Waveforms |
| Author(s) | George D Hathaway |
| Keywords | debunking, error analysis, false indications, instrumentation, overunity, power calculations |
| Published | 2003 |
| Journal | Electric Spacecraft Journal |
| Number | 36 |
| Pages | 25-27 |
Abstract
Claims of overunity can often be attributed to lack of familiarity with how oscilloscopes collect and display data. Slow sampling rates can alias actual trends and smooth spikes. Simultaneous displays of current and voltage readings often do not align corresponding data points vertically. For best results in calculating power, the current and voltage should be multiplied point-by-point and then integrated. The automatic power calculation features on some oscilloscopes erroneously integrate and then multiply. In addition, currents induced in lines from the environment are often underestimated. A checklist of common pitfalls is provided.