Author Topic: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity? (Read 568692 times)

Void · « **Reply #975 on:** June 03, 2013, 05:47:30 AM »

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 03, 2013, 05:19:01 AM

It would be interesting if you could equate the output impedances of the psu and the cap somehow, but I have no idea how to do this. It hardly seems fair to have to put a resistor in series with the supercap. It certainly looks like you are getting more ringing with the PSU, and this is a loss mechanism.

I am not sure what you mean about the resistor in series with the super cap, as this one ohm series resistor is exactly the same when using the regulated power supply, and both setups are set to very close to the same input voltage. That fuzziness on the input voltage waveform could be just a bit of noise coming from the power supply, and the noise doesn't show when using the super cap because the power supply is disconnected and switched off. Not sure though. I can't really explain yet why the current draw drops so much when using the super cap when it is set to the same voltage, while the output power consumption of the LED remains pretty close in both arrangements. Whatever the reason, it does seem to boost efficiency. In this last test run I left the super cap charging longer before starting the test so that the super cap voltage would be very close to what I had the power supply voltage to.

profitis · « **Reply #976 on:** June 03, 2013, 12:36:37 PM »

@tinselkoala ok can you do us both a favour and chop one of your old tantalums in half with a plyers, half between the 2 prongs,vertical not parallel,so that the black manganese dioxide layer and grey tantalum layer is clearly visible,i will tell you what to do next.

TinselKoala · « **Reply #977 on:** June 03, 2013, 02:40:09 PM »

Quote from: profitis on June 03, 2013, 12:36:37 PM

@tinselkoala ok can you do us both a favour and chop one of your old tantalums in half with a plyers, half between the 2 prongs,vertical not parallel,so that the black manganese dioxide layer and grey tantalum layer is clearly visible,i will tell you what to do next.

Ah.... no.
The last time I got into one of these "I'll tell you what to do next" things I wound up opening a portal into a dark universe of demons and djinn and it took weeks to close it again. Forget about it.
You tell me the whole thing up front, and I'll be the one to decide whether or not I take that next step.

profitis · « **Reply #978 on:** June 03, 2013, 06:41:29 PM »

@tk well if you touch one prickprong lead of your microampmeter to the black half(+) and the other to the grey area(-) you should register a continuous non-stop current.i did this years ago but didnt think anything of it then but now i want to try it again but ive got no tantalums at hand.i just want to know if you get same result and it wasnt an error on my part.the current was much larger with the sliced cap than the closed cap(which just showed capacitance current as opposed to continuous current)

TinselKoala · « **Reply #979 on:** June 03, 2013, 07:52:48 PM »

Quote from: Void on June 03, 2013, 05:47:30 AM

I am not sure what you mean about the resistor in series with the super cap, as this one ohm series resistor is exactly the same when using the regulated power supply, and both setups are set to very close to the same input voltage. That fuzziness on the input voltage waveform could be just a bit of noise coming from the power supply, and the noise doesn't show when using the super cap because the power supply is disconnected and switched off. Not sure though. I can't really explain yet why the current draw drops so much when using the super cap when it is set to the same voltage, while the output power consumption of the LED remains pretty close in both arrangements. Whatever the reason, it does seem to boost efficiency. In this last test run I left the super cap charging longer before starting the test so that the super cap voltage would be very close to what I had the power supply voltage to.

I think the cap and the PSU probably differ in "output impedance". I think this means that, for a given changing load, there will be a difference in the _current_ that the two methods will supply as the load changes. Clearly the JT is a changing load, both per-cycle and over longer time periods, and the capacitor is a supply that doesn't replenish itself. But the PSU is a "replenishing" supply. When you power from the PSU you are essentially powering from its filter capacitors, which are being kept "refilled" by the voltage regulator stage behind them.
I think the PSU probably has higher output impedance than the capacitor, but I don't know, and as I said I don't know how one would go about equating the output impedances of the two, but I am sure about this: impedance matching has a lot to do with power transfer efficiency and if there is a large mismatch between the supply and the load the transfer will be poor.

TinselKoala · « **Reply #980 on:** June 03, 2013, 07:57:59 PM »

Quote from: profitis on June 03, 2013, 06:41:29 PM

@tk well if you touch one prickprong lead of your microampmeter to the black half(+) and the other to the grey area(-) you should register a continuous non-stop current.i did this years ago but didnt think anything of it then but now i want to try it again but ive got no tantalums at hand.i just want to know if you get same result and it wasnt an error on my part.the current was much larger with the sliced cap than the closed cap(which just showed capacitance current as opposed to continuous current)

OK, I'll try it, although I really don't have what I would consider the appropriate meter here for this test, but I do have a 100 uA moving-coil meter I could try. To avoid me chopping up too many of my expensive tantalum caps, do you have a suggestion as to the capacitance and voltage ratings of the cap I should destroy for you? I have a fair assortment of values, and I have some of each type: radial-lead "droplets" and also some axial-lead cylinders.

profitis · « **Reply #981 on:** June 03, 2013, 08:36:03 PM »

@tk it was one of those square ones that one finds en mass on the power circuitboards of pc harddrives.they are each about the size of a pinkie-fingernail.those are the ones i tried but if you have larger ones at your disposal it would be better i assume.your analog microampmeter is perfect for the job.tell me what you see on your meter pls tk.

bryanwizard · « **Reply #982 on:** June 04, 2013, 05:41:09 AM »

i replicate JT several times and found out that Eff is less 80%.
similar topology like the boost converter.

TinselKoala · « **Reply #983 on:** June 04, 2013, 05:50:40 AM »

Quote from: profitis on June 03, 2013, 08:36:03 PM

@tk it was one of those square ones that one finds en mass on the power circuitboards of pc harddrives.they are each about the size of a pinkie-fingernail.those are the ones i tried but if you have larger ones at your disposal it would be better i assume.your analog microampmeter is perfect for the job.tell me what you see on your meter pls tk.

Hmmm. I'm not familiar with that type, and I'm not going to tear apart a hard drive looking for one. A SMD, I suppose from your description. All the tants I have are the droplet or tubular types, but I have a wide range of capacitances, from 0.1 uF to 33 uF or so. Presumably higher capacitance would be better for this experiment.

TinselKoala · « **Reply #984 on:** June 04, 2013, 05:56:38 AM »

Quote from: bryanwizard on June 04, 2013, 05:41:09 AM

i replicate JT several times and found out that Eff is less 80%.
similar topology like the boost converter.

Yep. But if your input power is free, and would be wasted if you didn't harvest it somehow.... that's good, right? And even 80 percent is pretty good if your input power is free, because...well... your input power was free. If it really is, that is. Maybe a "forever light" needs a chemical bias source that remains at 0.45 volts in order to be able to continue to harvest electrosmog for long periods of time or something, and the chemical source's voltage need not be depleted, as long as the power through the system is coming from the electrosmog.
Like the spring on a screen door. You only have to do work against it once, to open the door and prop it open with a rock. Then the flies can come and go as they please through the open door.
Experiments can be done to rule out all of these hypotheses, and finally the real explanation for Lawrence's "forever light" will emerge.

profitis · « **Reply #985 on:** June 04, 2013, 01:07:07 PM »

@tk you dont have any old junk circuitry lying around?like old computer parts?try it with your 33uf and see if it works tk,perhaps it,l work better.at this stage we have no explanation for this effect,if your cap can visibly make the meter bounce 1 or 2 micros when closed then thats the one to chop open.we want to see if it chopping open gets us a boost.we want to explain this mysterious effect.

TinselKoala · « **Reply #986 on:** June 04, 2013, 03:12:12 PM »

Like I said, I am not willing to waste a hard drive looking for your square tantalums, and the only other tantalum capacitors that I have ever seen on PC power supplies, etc, are the droplet or cylindrical types. I'll cut open one, ONE, of my 33 uF droplet or cylinder types for you sometime later today.

Void · « **Reply #987 on:** June 04, 2013, 04:54:37 PM »

@Lawrence: I have received your JT boards in the mail, and as soon as I get a chance I will run some power measurements on your boards and post the results here in this thread, if you like. Other than basic power efficiency tests at say an input power supply voltage of 0.5V, are there any other specific tests you would like me to run on the JT boards you sent me? I can also run comparison power measurement tests with a super capacitor as the input power source, and with a battery as the input power source, to compare results.

Edit:
A quick preliminary test on board #'s 118 and 119 (with the DC offset on my scope channels first checked for calibration) shows no zero crossing on the input current waveform, as would be expected. The waveform shapes appear to be pretty close to what I see on my JT circuit, with one difference being that Lawrence's boards run at a lower frequency than my JT board. I will run full power measurement tests on these boards as soon as I get a chance.

profitis · « **Reply #988 on:** June 04, 2013, 06:52:47 PM »

@tk thanx ,put one wire on the exposed black half and the other on the exposed grey half,directly.what do you see?

ingyenenergiagep · « **Reply #989 on:** June 04, 2013, 09:15:29 PM »

"i replicate JT several times and found out that Eff is less 80%."

Try higher voltage, 555 IC and FET.

Cookie	Origin	Persistency	Information and Usage
ecl_auth	overunity.com	Expires after 30 days	This cookie contains the text "EU Cookie Law - LiPF cookies authorised". Without this cookie, the Forums' software is prevented from setting other cookies.
SMFCookie648	overunity.com	Expires according to user-chosen session duration	If you log-in as a member of this site, this cookie contains your user name, an encrypted hash of your password and the time you logged-in. It is used by the site software to ensure that features such as indicating new Forum and Private messages are indicated to you. This cookie is essential for the site software to work correctly.
PHPSESSID	overunity.com	Current session only	This cookie contains a unique Session Identification value. It is set for both members and non-members (guests) and it is essential for the site software to work correctly. This cookie is not persistent and should be automatically removed when you close the browser window.
pmx_upshr{NAME}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records your display preferences for the site's Portal page if a panel or individual block is collapsed or expanded
pmx_pgidx_blk{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the page number for the site's Portal page if the page for a individual block is changed.
pmx_cbtstat{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the expand/collapse state for a CBT Navigator block content.
pmx_poll{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the id for the current poll in a multiple Poll block.
pmx_{fadername}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the state for a Opac-Fader block.
pmx_LSBsub{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the current category and the state for a static Category block.
pmx_shout{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the current state of a Shout box block.
pmx_php_ckeck	overunity.com	Page load time	This cookie will probably never see you. It is set, if a Syntax check on a PHP block is initiated and will be deleted if the function executed.
pmx_YOfs	overunity.com	Page load time	This cookie will probably never see you. It is set on portal actions like click on a page number. The cookie is evaluated on load the desired page and then deleted. It is used to restore the vertical screen position as before the click.

1	We are aware that Google uses additional cookies it stores on your PC and when you browse our site and all other sites. These are used to target advertising and Google currently does this without seeking your permission. Four of these cookies we know about are named "rememberme", "NID", "PREF" and "PP_TOS_ACK" and are stored in Google's cache on your computer.
2	If you are accessing this site using someone else's computer, please ask the owner's permission before accepting cookies.
3	Your browser provides you with the ability to inspect all cookies stored on your PC. In addition your browser is responsible for removing "current session only" cookies and those that have expired; if your browser is not doing this, you should report the matter to your browser's authors.
4	We regret and apologies for any inconvenience this causes to members and guests who are accessing our web site from outside the European Union. It is not currently possible for us to interrogate your browser and obtain geographic location information in order to decide whether or not to prompt you to accept cookies.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity? (Read 568692 times)

Void

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

profitis

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

TinselKoala

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

profitis

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

TinselKoala

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

TinselKoala

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

profitis

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

bryanwizard

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

TinselKoala

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

TinselKoala

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

profitis

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

TinselKoala

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

Void

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

profitis

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

ingyenenergiagep

Re: Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?