Nando,
I can only see the pictures YOU paint. I don't know what is in your head, only what you show us. If you cannot express youself accurately, or succinctly, then I cannot decipher that which you may be trying to say. ie you may think you are saying one thing, when to others, you come out different to what you thought.
I only answer your manic reply because you have asked a valid and direct question, which deserves an answer.
"Here first ask what was said on what bases -- and for one, the software in the TAMU project was free to get -- so imbecile -- try to be honest with your words -- which I see you are not."
Now I think that means ........possibly that means that you are asking for an explanation of why I thought that you tried to gain information via a surruptitious route unsucessfully. is that it?
"I was aware of it, early when released, just to be familiar with the software, I tried to get the source code -- no luck, even tough I had, in TAMU, a professor friend trying to get it for me -- the students kept it and the professors did not care to keep copies.
The students are gone and most of them will be using the design for their own benefit-- financially --."
Thats why.
You claim intimate knowledge of it either before it was released, or early in its release, can't work out quite which one you mean.
To am imbecile like me that means when it was current at the very least. Your further attempts to get hold of the software which you claim as public domain now, came to nothing.( -- no luck,) That doesn't sound too free and public otherwise in your position you would have it. but no - still nothing.
In a further attempt to gain access to this "free software " you employ the services of your good friend the professor a TAMU insider. Still no luck.
So by now all attempts to get this "free software" possibly before release (thats not made completely clear by you) or early in its release (whichever of the two you meant) or via inside help after release, you were still unable to procure this software, which one has to assume is specific to this project and freely available..............why on earth would I think otherwise.
Even if you had informed us at the start it was free, with that series of events, it would be hard to believe.
Without being told (not a mindreader yet), have no doubt, its not my first response. No sane person would look at that chain of events and say, gee that must have been free software.
Just to push the point, you then go on to regret that the students that were there have gone, and run away to make their fortune....."The students are gone and most of them will be using the design for their own benefit-- financially --"....with the software that you are lamenting that you were unable to procure?
?
Silly me for thinking that you were wistfully hoping to have done the same thing. That is what you were saying, and if not, then that's how it comes accross.
I'm sorry Nando, you can admonish me all you like but that is what you have said. If you don't agree with what you have written, then write something else. But before you fall off your perch again-------re-read what you have written. Divorce yourself from what you think you meant, and figure out what picture you have painted for us to see.
You claim to be a professional, well try and be professional and use your logic, not your feelings.... look at the facts, not your hopes.
I can only hope that you read this carefully, it may help your communications in future. The other post that you objected to can be subjected to the same analysis. Ambiguous statements will invaraibly lead to mis-understanding.
Nando:
"I designed such transformerless inverter about 8 or 10 years ago and only 3 has been built, I gave the design away, that even showed ways to produce 10+ KW for 115 volts and 30 KW for 220 volts -- because very few people think in the advantages of high battery voltage --"
Fanman found something close to it and he bought the schematic -- with free time I will try to draw improvements for his ckt -- consulting time is my priority -- it pay well, that one day of work pays more than one week of work for many.
Here you claim ownership of the transformerless design "I designed such transformerless inverter about 8 or 10 years ago" You then go on the say that fanman had found a design similar and bought the schematic of that which you are the owner.
If he bought your design, one would assume that he has bought it from you. You then go on to say that you will draw circuit with improvements in spare TIME...so it is your design, and then you go on to say that "-- consulting time is my priority -- it pay well, that one day of work pays more than one week of work for many." So it can be assumed rightly or wrongly, depends how you read it, that in your spare time you help people by improving their circuits, and charge them consultancy.
You now claim that you meant companies not poeple, but that is not the picture that you painted.
Once again Nando, I urge you to try and not be ambiguious. If you get misunderstood, don't assume that the rest of the world are lying cheaters who are imbaciles (some of us are), but most are not.
I would prefer to think that I was not. You bare the responsibility for your comments. If they are poorly written, then they will be poorly understood or misconstrued. remember we can only see what you show us.
Before I go, I assume we will not be corresponding again, although I leave that door open, I still think that it is poor design that makes power electronics iffy. My designs are poor, but work very well for me. Are yours good enough for others to emulate successfully . If not it's your fault. A better more stable design can be done for all. But it won't be you, as you also have said..
".Basic reason I do not offer schematics -- First the effort to offer it is EXPENSIVE in time, if you are willing to offer it , it would take many hours ( sometimes several hundred hours ) to make the circuit work reliable."
"To spend the time to develop a KIT that anyone can build takes a lot of time and money that unless many buy it, it would a financial disaster, so a job in futility.
MANY -- means several thousands !!"
I have developed projects in smaller runs than that..25, 50 just to help others in my industry. Mostly pwm traction motor drives like the curtis...and no Nando, curtis use curtis chips for their pwm driver so it's not a copy.mine use 324's and 339's for that part.
I hope this gives you some insight as to "Here first ask what was said on what bases --"
goodbye Nando
..............oztules
