GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 499745
  • *Total Topics: 14807
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 28
  • *Total: 30

Author Topic: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?  (Read 385758 times)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #135 on: November 30, 2012, 10:09:50 PM »
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110630015105AAuZR0y
Can power factor of an electrical system be measured as a negative value?
A negative power factor would indicate that current leads or lags the voltage by more than 90 degrees. Physically, that can happen if the load is returning power to the source rather than using power. For example, if an induction motor is used to operate an electric railway locomotive, the power factor will be lagging by less than 90 degrees as the locomotive climbs a hill. If the motor is nearly loaded, the power factor might be about 0.85. If the track is level at the top of the hill, the motor's load will be reduced and the power factor might drop to 0.65. As the locomotive begin to go downhill, the power factor drops more and may be come negative as the motor begins to operate as a generator returning braking power to the source.
Source(s):
I have worked as an engineer in the manufacture of variable frequency drives (VFD). We tested drives under load by using the VFD under test to control an induction motor which drove a second induction motor that was connected to utility (mains) power. Using the VFD to slightly overspeed the second motor forced that motor to become a generator and return power to the utility.
 
Another Answer:
 
The power factor itself, will be positive, between 0 and 1, and is given from cos (theta).
 
 If it is 1, your load is purely resistive.
 If it is 0, your load is purely reactive.
 
 The angle theta, however, could be negative or positive.
 
 If it's negative, then the reactive portion is capacitive, and your voltage is lagging behind the current.
 
 If it's positive, then the reactive portion is inductive, and voltage is leading current.

Lawrence this is garbage. It is true, but it does not apply to your instantaneous power computations. POWER FACTOR is not POWER. Your instantaneous power curves that go negative at the end have nothing to do with POWER FACTOR or returning power to the source.

When you do instantaneous multiplication of current and voltage, as you are doing, your POWER FACTOR is automatically compensated for. It is only when you are dealing with average values of regular sine waves of current and voltage, phase shifted because of reactance in the load, that you need to consider power factor and do all of that trig algebra.

http://www.tina.com/English/tina/course/29power/power
Quote
  There are several different definitions of power in AC circuits; all, however, have dimension of V*A or W (watts).
1.      Instantaneous power: [/i] p(t) is the time function of the power,  p(t) = u(t)*i(t). It is the product of the time functions of the voltage and current. This definition of instantaneous power is valid for signals of any waveform. The unit for instantaneous power [/i]is VA.
2.      Complex power: [/i] S [/font]Complex power is the product of the complex effective voltage and the complex effective conjugate current. In our notation here, the conjugate is indicated by an asterisk (*).Complex power can also be computed using the peak values of the complex voltage and current, but then the result must be divided by 2. Note that complex power is applicable only to circuits with sinusoidal excitation because complex effective or peak values exist and are defined only for sinusoidal signals. The unit for complex power [/i]is VA. [/font]3.      Real [/i]or average power[/i]:  P can be defined in two ways: as the real part of the complex power or as the simple average of the instantaneous power.[/i] The  second definition is more general because with it we can define the instantaneous power [/i]for any signal waveform, not just for sinusoids. It is given explicitly in the following expression The unit for real[/i] or average power[/i]  is watts (W), just as for power in DC circuits. Real power is dissipated as heat in resistances.
4.      Reactive power:  [/i]Q is the imaginary part of the complex power. It is given in units of volt-amperes reactive[/i] (VAR). Reactive power is positive[/i] in an inductive[/i] circuit[/i] and negative[/i] in a capacitive circuit[/i]. This power is defined only for sinusoidal excitation. The reactive power doesn't do any useful work or heat and it is the power returned to the source by the reactive components (inductors, capacitors) of the circuit [/font]
  5.      Apparent power: [/i]S is the product of the rms values of the voltage and the current, S = U*I. The unit of apparent power is VA. The apparent power[/i] is the absolute value of the complex power[/i], so it is defined only for sinusoidal excitation.[/font]

Well, the formatting and the formulae got screwed up in the quote. Please go to the link and read it there. I have highlighted the part you are misunderstanding. Your discussion of Power Factor is irrelevant because you are obtaining your instantaneous power curve by multiplying the instantaneous values of voltage and current.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #135 on: November 30, 2012, 10:09:50 PM »

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #136 on: November 30, 2012, 10:13:21 PM »
Mark Dansie and team visited G-LED USA and were impressed.  They saw the FLEET without battery lighting during the entire meeting.  They also saw the 2KW unit lighting 2,500 LEDs.

Their plan is to fly to Hong Kong to meet me and the owners of BSI.  They wanted to purchase a number of Lead-out Energy Research kits for testing now and may go into business arrangement afterwards.

Apparently, they have much better equipped laboratories and can do the 4 channel, maths function tests.  My indication experiments will be improved to a much higher degree of accuracy.

The owners of G-LED and BSI will also meet shortly to decide on the marketing strategy.  Hopefully, that will happen before Christmas.

The Divine Wine will be tasted by many this Christmas.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #137 on: November 30, 2012, 10:34:08 PM »
I said,
I am astounded !! Lawrence.... that is even worse! You CANNOT take output data from one twenty minute run and compare it "minute by minute"  with input data from another, different twenty minute run!!! Who told you that was legitimate?
I am flabbergasted that you would even consider doing such a thing. It's outrageous. It invalidates ALL of your comparison data.
LTseung replied:
Quote
*** As I mentioned, I do indication experiments.  The top universities will have the DSO and experts to do the real experiments.  That is why we need them.
You are getting them all excited over your claims, which are based on your invalid data from your "indication experiments". You are crying wolf when there is no wolf. The more times people do this, the less credibility we all have. You cannot do "indication experiments" INCORRECTLY and then draw conclusions and make claims of overunity! It give everybody a bad name.

I asked,
How are you "discharging thoroughly" your capacitor? Please give me the exact procedure you use for this, including times.

And LTseung answered,
Quote
*** Use a wire to directly connect the two ends of the capacitor for 5 minutes.  Put it back on the JT circuit and the LED should show no light.  Check the Output voltage waveform on the Atten Oscilloscope.  It should show NO more characteristic pulsing waveform.
That might barely be acceptable, but I should think that a much longer time "shorted" by the jumper would be necessary for a low-voltage supercap. I only have 3 Farads, but I'll do some experiments and see what I can learn.
However, the issue is moot because you simply cannot use output and input data from different runs for comparison purposes. You do not have control of all the conditions that could affect your measurements. To be able to make the claim that input power was less than output power in a circuit with constantly varying parameters,  you have to measure them at the same time! You might be able to get somewhere by measuring input and output voltage on one run, then measuring input and output current on another run, and then computing your power curves from data taken that way. At least that way you will have simultaneous measurements of _something_ on your input and output. But I still doubt the validity of comparisons made this way.
You don't need to even use the scope for your input measurements, though. Simply monitor the input current and voltage with DMMs and the time with a precise timer. Your graphs reveal that average values will accurately reflect your input power function.

But you must not conclude overunity performance based on your present data gathering methodology. You are comparing apples grown in one season, with apples grown in the next season, and you have no idea of the variables that changed over the winter.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #137 on: November 30, 2012, 10:34:08 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #138 on: November 30, 2012, 10:39:57 PM »
Mark Dansie and team visited G-LED USA and were impressed.  They saw the FLEET without battery lighting during the entire meeting.  They also saw the 2KW unit lighting 2,500 LEDs.

Their plan is to fly to Hong Kong to meet me and the owners of BSI.  They wanted to purchase a number of Lead-out Energy Research kits for testing now and may go into business arrangement afterwards.

Apparently, they have much better equipped laboratories and can do the 4 channel, maths function tests.  My indication experiments will be improved to a much higher degree of accuracy.

The owners of G-LED and BSI will also meet shortly to decide on the marketing strategy.  Hopefully, that will happen before Christmas.

The Divine Wine will be tasted by many this Christmas.

Lawrence, I have circuits sitting here right in front of me, running right now,  that FAR outperform the circuits you are describing here. The reason I am not being wined and dined by Divine Wine and being showered with money and accolades is because I AM NOT MAKING CLAIMS THAT CANNOT BE SUPPORTED BY ACTUAL DATA.


Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #139 on: December 03, 2012, 09:34:59 AM »
Dear All,

I am facing the following problem and need a reasonable solution:
How to use ONE oscilloscope to compare the Input Power and Output Power when both are decreasing with time?
The Atten Oscilloscope has 2 channels.  We can use Ch1 to measure Instantaneous Voltage and Ch2 to measure Instantaneous Current.  Such data can be captured as CSV files to be analysed by EXCEL.  The important equation is:
Instantaneous Power = Instantaneous Voltage x Instantaneous Current
We can use the Atten Oscilloscope to measure Input waveforms and output waveforms separately but not simultaneously.

Changing the connections from Output measurement to Input measurement will take approximately 1 minute.

At present, I try to produce the same initial condition – same procedure in turning the DC Power Supply ON with the capacitor totally discharged (as checked on the oscilloscope).  Then take reading at 1 minute intervals.  Use two separate runs - one for Input and one for Output.

Is there a better method assuming that you only have ONE 2 channel oscilloscope?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #139 on: December 03, 2012, 09:34:59 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #140 on: December 03, 2012, 03:18:10 PM »
Yes, Lawrence, there is. But first you must realize that POWER is not the conserved quantity of interest when making excess ENERGY claims of overunity or COP>1.

The true energy INPUT to your system is the energy used to charge the capacitor. But the energy used by the system is what is on the capacitor, not what was used to charge it (there will be losses in the charging process that have nothing to do with the energy balance of the JT itself.)

 Since the energy on the capacitor at any time is easily calculated from knowing the capacitance (fixed) and the voltage (varying with time), you can simply measure the voltage on the cap at the beginning of the run, and at the end of the run.  The energy in Joules is E=(CV2)/2, so you subtract the energy remaining on the cap at the end, from the energy on the cap at the beginning, and this will give you the number of Joules the cap supplied during the run.

Your scope provides the current and voltage output data; the time integration of the instantaneous power curve calculated from these values will give you the total output energy in Joules over the time of the test. These numbers may be legitimately compared with the energy supplied by the cap as calculated above.

A refinement will then be to measure accurately the energy used to charge the cap in the first place, which can also be done with your scope by monitoring the voltage on the cap and the current as it is charged to the desired voltage, multiplying and integrating as usual to get the number of Joules you applied to charge the cap to your test voltage.

So there are two different "input" energy measurements: that which the cap supplies to the circuit during the run, and that which was used to charge the cap in the first place. The first can be easily known by measuring the voltage before and after the run and computing the energy using the formula. The second can be known by scope monitoring, and since it is done _before_ the cap is used to run the circuit, you have time to change the scope hookup and take output power (current and voltage) readings that will be multiplied and integrated by your spreadsheet and legitimately compared to the energy used to charge the cap right before the test run.


Offline plengo

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #141 on: December 03, 2012, 03:57:21 PM »
That is a very interesting way of measuring the input/output. So with the Cap we would have  a definite buffer of input energy while the output we measure with the scope.


Quick question, would not the dropping voltage of the cap as we use it in the JT change the whole behavior of the JT and therefore its performance?


I had the impression that JT needs a stable input power to perform to its peak performance, no?


Great tip.

Fausto.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #141 on: December 03, 2012, 03:57:21 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #142 on: December 03, 2012, 05:23:15 PM »
That is a very interesting way of measuring the input/output. So with the Cap we would have  a definite buffer of input energy while the output we measure with the scope.


Quick question, would not the dropping voltage of the cap as we use it in the JT change the whole behavior of the JT and therefore its performance?
Yes, as the voltage decays the frequency of the JT oscillation changes. As long as you are within a certain range though, you don't notice this by looking at the light output. The light comes from short peaks in the oscillations, so as the frequency changes the duration and spacing of the peaks also changes. As I understand Lawrence's scheme, the timer allows one to set the interval between cap recharges. This is inefficient as I have pointed out because the cap is charged fully as soon as it is at the desired voltage; leaving it connected to the main power source any longer than that is wasteful. I think it should be done like this: the cap voltage should be compared to some reference voltage by a comparator. When the cap voltage reaches the preset value and the comparator flips state, the cap is disconnected from the supply and allowed to run the JT. When the cap voltage then drops to another preselected value, after say 20 minutes but this time going not by time but by energy, the cap is reconnected to the charging source for another "jolt" of energy.

Quote

I had the impression that JT needs a stable input power to perform to its peak performance, no?


Great tip.

Fausto.
Yes, that's right. Since the frequency changes with the voltage change, one would like to keep the input voltage stable at or near the optimum value. This can be done while still running primarily on the cap by tightening the "interval" using the preset comparison voltage. Keep the cap within, say, 1.2 and 1.3 volts by recharging it whenever it drops below the preset 1.2 volts. Or even tighter: 1.25 to 1.30 volts, say. Of course the tighter your voltage control, the more often you will have to recharge, but the smaller the energy input from each recharge.

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #143 on: December 03, 2012, 06:08:59 PM »
Yes, Lawrence, there is. But first you must realize that POWER is not the conserved quantity of interest when making excess ENERGY claims of overunity or COP>1..............

If we have two 2 channel oscilloscopes, can we use one to measure the Input Power and one to measure the Output Power at the same time?   We can easily calculate the average power values.  Will that be a legit comparison?
 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #143 on: December 03, 2012, 06:08:59 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #144 on: December 03, 2012, 07:36:12 PM »
If we have two 2 channel oscilloscopes, can we use one to measure the Input Power and one to measure the Output Power at the same time?   We can easily calculate the average power values.  Will that be a legit comparison?
Yes and no. In the first place you are not concerned with POWER, but energy. Please try to remember that. The instantaneous power curve is the intermediate step to obtaining energy flow values, and it is the energy that is important.

Yes, you can take one run, monitored with two oscilloscopes as you describe, and use the integral of the instantaneous power curves for your comparison. However you will have to use statistical procedures to assure that there are no differences in the scopes or probes etc. that affect your values. This means that you will have to do multiple runs (required anyway), switching the positions of the scopes between runs, and average the values across runs, then compare the average values, including a measure of variance like standard deviation or standard error of the mean. So you might do 10 runs, with 5 having Scope A monitoring the input, and 5 having Scope B monitoring the input. This will cancel out any influence of the scopes themselves on the data. This won't allow you to do moment-by-moment comparisons, though, only the final energy numbers will have meaning.

And No, because you will not be able to synchronize the measurements between the two scopes. If you want to display graphs of the rundown as you did in your spreadsheet, moment by moment, the moments must be known precisely. Each data point for input and output power  must be made simultaneously for a true moment-by-moment comparison (one voltage and one current data point for each input and output, 4 values simultaneously). If one scope is, say, half a second behind the other one then the momentary comparison will be inaccurate, even though the final computed energy integral values may be correct for the two scopes (if you are comparing the exact same time interval, which requires synch).  Really, the 2 channel scope will make the measurements on each channel consecutively, separated by its minimum sample interval, but there is nothing to be done about that. Fortunately the error from this inherent lack of simultaneity will be small if your sample rate is high. It is important to remember that the DSO is a digital Sampling oscilloscope and it only takes one sample at a time, no matter how many channels it has or what its sample rate is. This will inevitably introduce some error into computations requiring simultaneous values on two variables like instantaneous power computations.

It is possible to synch separate oscilloscopes but take my word for it.... it is beyond your pay grade, and would only introduce unnecessary complexity in what _should_ be a relatively simple process.

It is much simpler and even more accurate to use a DMM of high impedance and accuracy to make precise readings of the capacitor voltages and use that to compute the input ENERGY to your system. Of course you must also know accurately your true capacitance value, which can also be easily determined in various ways. The best way is to set up a resonant circuit with a known inductance, find the resonant frequency, and compute the capacitance from that. Or you can let an RLC meter do the same thing and give you a number in a nice box.

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #145 on: December 03, 2012, 11:44:37 PM »
Yes and no. In the first place you are not concerned with POWER, but energy. Please try to remember that. The instantaneous power curve is the intermediate step to obtaining energy flow values, and it is the energy that is important.

Thank you for the very informative answer.  I am lucky to have two Atten oscilloscopes. 
On another point, some universities have the 4 channel high end DSOs.  Will that make the measurement easier and more accurate?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #145 on: December 03, 2012, 11:44:37 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13763
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #146 on: December 04, 2012, 03:57:27 AM »
Thank you for the very informative answer.  I am lucky to have two Atten oscilloscopes. 
On another point, some universities have the 4 channel high end DSOs.  Will that make the measurement easier and more accurate?
Facepalm.
Will you please go back and read my previous posts?

There is a difference between precision and accuracy. Using the high end 4 channel scope with live math and integration will make your measurements easier and more PRECISE. Not necessarily more accurate. And in this case, accuracy is much more important than another decimal place or two of precision.

Consider the archer. She fires her arrows at a big target with a tiny red center bullseye.  She tries her best to hit the bullseye dead center (accuracy). She strives to do this with every arrow she fires with very small error (precision).

So she fires off some arrows, and all four of them are in a tight cluster, only a millimeter space between them. This is PRECISION.

But... alas, the cluster is way down and to the left of the aim point, the bullseye. This is a lack of ACCURACY.

So she adjusts the sight of her bow, she trims the fletching of her arrows and fires off four more arrows. This time they are in a looser group, they are further apart. She has lost some PRECISION.

But.... look, one of the arrows is dead center on the red bullseye and the rest are clustered just a few millimeters away. She has achieved much greater ACCURACY, even though her precision is less than before.


Which would you rather achieve, better Precision, or better Accuracy?

Offline plengo

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #147 on: December 04, 2012, 04:16:13 AM »
Facepalm.
Will you please go back and read my previous posts?

There is a difference between precision and accuracy. Using the high end 4 channel scope with live math and integration will make your measurements easier and more PRECISE. Not necessarily more accurate. And in this case, accuracy is much more important than another decimal place or two of precision.

Consider the archer. She fires her arrows at a big target with a tiny red center bullseye.  She tries her best to hit the bullseye dead center (accuracy). She strives to do this with every arrow she fires with very small error (precision).

So she fires off some arrows, and all four of them are in a tight cluster, only a millimeter space between them. This is PRECISION.

But... alas, the cluster is way down and to the left of the aim point, the bullseye. This is a lack of ACCURACY.

So she adjusts the sight of her bow, she trims the fletching of her arrows and fires off four more arrows. This time they are in a looser group, they are further apart. She has lost some PRECISION.

But.... look, one of the arrows is dead center on the red bullseye and the rest are clustered just a few millimeters away. She has achieved much greater ACCURACY, even though her precision is less than before.


Which would you rather achieve, better Precision, or better Accuracy?


 ;)  That was a beautiful explanation.

Offline Pirate88179

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8363
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #148 on: December 04, 2012, 06:43:00 AM »
TK:

Wow!  Thank you.  I have learned a lot from your last several responses here.  Well done and thanks again for this information.

Bill

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?
« Reply #149 on: December 04, 2012, 07:20:46 AM »
Most people hope to achieve both precision and accuracy.
 
My eyesight is poor and my hands are shaky.  I only hope not to pour too much wine on the floor.
 
I would like to bring in the topic of "negative power".  This will show up lots of times in the Input and Output Power measurements.  What is your interpretation?????
 
It looks liky that the Christmas Present to the World in 2012 is the confirmation of lead-out energy via two oscilloscopes.  Pumping out experimental data will not be a problem now.

 

OneLink