In fact, as I pointed out, Ian Robinson sent me a detailed overview of his design for Redgum amps, and it was met with total
and utter silence.
Speaking for myself, I did not immediately reply out of politeness.
Mr. Robinson obviously didn't want to explain the design, and only offered his assurances.
That is hardly an explanation containing a concept or a goal of some kind - let alone a technical explanation.
Trust me, I made the effort to see into his mind with sketches, and my own explanations about it possibly functioning as a mass-sink in lieu of a traditional heatsink.
I didn't, and the forum didn't get any explanation along these lines in return for our efforts and attempts to understand how the design works.
In fact, only a few posts ago JackD201 is calling it a "collector" - I assume this is progress being made.
Had Mr. Robinson called it a "collector" or "mass-sink" in lieu of a "heatsink", then we would at least know that he understands how his own design works.
Right now I'm not sure what to make of it, because the person calling himself a
professional reviewer and
industry expert admits to lacking a technical background which could aid us in this situation.
Now, about DaveC's remarks...................
That pic where the rectifier is supposed to be touching an electrolytic cap looks suspect to me, I do not believe they are touching. If you look down there is no solder pad for the rectifier right next to the cap. And it's not exactly esoteric knowledge that electrolytic caps shouldn't touch parts that get hot. IMO this is a good example of armchair engineering gone bad, and there were many more like it. I think some of the criticism was based on incorrect assumptions and it certainly went way too far, for example the guy who said everything would reach the same temps internally, this is just wrong. I don't think criticism should not be allowed
I've put in bold a few things which may deserve some kind of further explanation or support of some kind by DaveC-
in my opinion.
RE: armchair engineering gone bad...............only if you are right about the two parts NOT touching. I'm going to assume that the person taking the pictures had a better vantage point than us and made the correct call. Second guessing someone else's observations without cracking open a unit yourself is non-scientific to say the least.
RE: same temps internally................the parts are all in the sealed box together, sort of like being in the same bath water together (air and water each following the rules of
fluid dynamics). Some parts will generate heat and radiate it into the air, other parts not as hot will absorb that heat out of the air. One of the rules of thermal dynamics is that nature seeks an equilibrium, or words to that effect.
I can see how that comment was made in light of the whole "collector" or "mass-sink" description being missing in Mr. Robinson's explanation of how the thing works.
We in the forum in fact are still struggling to understand this design in the
void the review and the designer have created.
..............................................................
Really isn't this tiring?
Just tell us how it's suppose to work instead of telling us not to worry about it.
Some of us just want to know how things work, is that so bad?