Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Solid States Devices => Joule Thief => Topic started by: nul-points on January 10, 2016, 08:52:09 PM

Title: To be deleted...
Post by: nul-points on January 10, 2016, 08:52:09 PM
Bonne année, overunity people!

Got to laugh at the complexity and/or 'scientific' foundation of recent flashlight/lantern offerings from points East

For all you frustrated replicators/hopeful customers, here's a little seasonal present to keep you amused while you wait for something/anything worthwhile to come of yet more fruitless effort, or waste of $100

So - this is my offering in the world of flashlights:  use flyback energy to charge a second battery via LED(s)

Ok, nothing novel, there - except....

Here's a little demonstrator i put together this weekend - and as a 'starter for 10', it's not looking too shabby!

This example uses only 1 AAA 750mAh NiMH as an input 'battery', a similar cell as output, and a single Hi-brite white LED as the lamp - the same type of circuit arrangement could be used for additional cells and LEDs

The circuit is based on a flyback switchmode PSU arrangement  (in this case, a Boost Converter), B2 gets charged with the same flyback current pulses illuminating LED1.

After operating the flashlight sufficiently to discharge B1, the switch S1 can be toggled to swap the i/p & o/p cells/batteries and the process repeats.

Obviously, this arrangement will extend the use of the flashlight, compared to the same initial charge supplied to a single cell without the recharge circuitry

If you wish to experiment with this configuration, you'll see that my circuit is pretty much generic - the transistors i've used have been either high-gain, low power, eg BC337, or medium power, eg BFY51.  Transformer T1 needs sufficient turns ratio to swtch Q1 reliably, my T1 is a Maplin Ferrite Toroid, approx 30mm OD x 25mm high, using 0.45mm magnet wire.  No pulse timing, this thing oscillates at the natural frequency of the assembled parts (approx 500kHz, in my case). Inductor L1 (approx 2.5mH here) may not be necessary, it's a legacy from other stuff i've been doing,  C1 is helping to buffer the input supply, i use a 1500uF electrolytic.  Diodes are Schottky, type BAT42,

I don't think any components are critical or unusual - i have introduced an air-gap into the toroid, mostly as a salute to the late Harold Aspden!  ;-)

I'm hoping to attach the schematic and a sample datalog graph of the discharge/charging voltage trends - i was going to take a photo of my scrappy build, to give an idea of the LED intensity, but i just found (ironically) that both my batteries for my camera are discharged so that will have to wait.  The LED is bright enough to block visual sight of the layout when viewed from approx half a metre above.

PS ...although the graph may LOOK as if the flashlight is already OU, with the charging cell voltage slope being steeper than the discharging cell slope, obviously further (and certainly more rigourous) testing would be required to establish the efficiency of the system

However - this system works - its cheap, simple ...and it's likely to be a whole lot more efficient than some of the offerings being touted as OU!

Enjoy  :-)

np

http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.co.uk/

Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: SkyWatcher123 on January 11, 2016, 05:24:02 AM
Hi nul-points, thanks for sharing.
I'm working on my own version right now.
Mine will use a gutted filament type led bulb, 3.6 watt, 450 lumen type.
Using flyback ferrite core.
I have around bifilar 220 turn primary oscillator, 6 layers, using 24awg. magnet wire.
Using 3.7 volt lithium ion cell.
Hopefully the 220 turn primary will give some good high voltage spikes to light the 120 volt led bulb to decent brightness and charge the second cell good, we shall see.
peace love light :)
Edit: oh and for now, i will just manually swap lithium ion cells, until i get proper switches.
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 11, 2016, 06:51:30 AM
...
I'm working on my own version right now.
Mine will use a gutted filament type led bulb, 3.6 watt, 450 lumen type.
Using flyback ferrite core.
I have around bifilar 220 turn primary oscillator, 6 layers, using 24awg. magnet wire.
Using 3.7 volt lithium ion cell.
Hopefully the 220 turn primary will give some good high voltage spikes to light the 120 volt led bulb to decent brightness and charge the second cell good...
 i will just manually swap lithium ion cells, until i get proper switches.

Hey Mr T

that sounds like a cool build - and i know that it will be a good quality one!

...hmmm - that's just reminded me that i have an AA single-cell-powered JT-driven lamp (using a 220V LED 50mm halogen spot replacement bulb) kindly given to me by old OU buddy Nerzh Dishual, when we exchanged project builds a few years back...  ;-)

i look forward to hearing the results you get with your project - i've had good indications already on mine, even with this minimalist version

How do Li-ion batteries interface to flyback spikes?  I've only ever tried NiMH, NiCad & SLA, all of which have been fine at low charging rates in earlier unrelated projects

Keep us posted!
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: SkyWatcher123 on January 11, 2016, 08:23:38 PM
Hi nul-points, I'm having good indications with mine as well.
However, had to use 2 warm white top hat leds in series, not enough voltage for the 120 volt led bulb.
I think a secondary coil with more turns and then use the 120 volt led bulb as diode to charge lithium cell might work.
Not sure how well that would charge the single lithium ion cell, considering the voltage will be higher, whereas the 2 leds in series probably drops the voltage down from the primary flyback.
I also have mine, for now, with the 2 leds off the collector into positive of charge cell and negative of cell to common of circuit.
The voltages seem to be tracking very closely, as far as the loss on input and gain on charging cell.
The lithium cells seem to take the charge fine, of course they are larger capacity and take about 2 hours at the 20 milliamp input to go from 3.93 to 3.94 volts.
peace love light
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: TinselKoala on January 12, 2016, 07:55:34 AM
Nice work, Doc! The graph is particularly good to see. We are so rarely given real data to chew on. Keep up the good work!
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 12, 2016, 08:49:22 AM
...I'm having good indications with mine as well.
However, had to use 2 warm white top hat leds in series, not enough voltage for the 120 volt led bulb.
I think a secondary coil with more turns and then use the 120 volt led bulb as diode to charge lithium cell might work.
Not sure how well that would charge the single lithium ion cell, considering the voltage will be higher, whereas the 2 leds in series probably drops the voltage down from the primary flyback.
I also have mine, for now, with the 2 leds off the collector into positive of charge cell and negative of cell to common of circuit.
The voltages seem to be tracking very closely, as far as the loss on input and gain on charging cell.
The lithium cells seem to take the charge fine, of course they are larger capacity and take about 2 hours at the 20 milliamp input to go from 3.93 to 3.94 volts.
...

You've given yourself some interesting challenges there, SW, right off the bat!  :-)

But it will be a nice piece of kit when it all comes together.

I suspect that if you can get the intended lamp drive sorted first, to your own satisfaction,  then the Li-ion charging will sort of fall into place

Some useful comparative discussion by Maxim chip co. in the following link about relative pros & cons of charging Li-ion by switched, linear & pulsed methods - might be some useful pointers or confirmation there if you haven't seen it already (just for the issues, i mean, not that you might use their chips!)
  https://www.maximintegrated.com/en/app-notes/index.mvp/id/913#

The high-from-low voltage requirement sounds like a job for the old auto spark generator arrangement of coupled coils (aka 'auto-transformer'?) , looks like a transformer, but is driven by flyback action (might be similar to Tesla coil behaviour?)

Your system is going to have a good energy density!  ...looking forward to hearing how it develops


Thanks for comments, TK - appreciated!

np
 

Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: fritz on January 12, 2016, 03:11:59 PM

There is a charge / discharge graph for NiMH chemistry, fig5

http://www.cobasys.com/pdf/tutorial/InsideNimhBattery/inside_nimh_battery_technology.html


Between 50% and 80%, the figures are parallel, 70mV spacing.





Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: SkyWatcher123 on January 12, 2016, 09:20:49 PM
Hi nul-points, oh and i just realized you were quoting crocodile dundee, lol.
Well, i swiped the tv flyback coil/core i had in one of my lamps for testing, as it lighted the led bulb in question to good brightness, though it uses a 30awg. secondary coil.
As i suspected and you must have suspected as well, i need a separate step down transformer in line with the led bulb/secondary coil, since the lithium is not taking the higher voltage charge well, compared to the setup more like yours.
Maybe i will try nimh cells and see how they charge with the higher voltage.
peace love light
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 13, 2016, 12:10:14 AM
Thanks for the link, fritz - interesting to step back in time and see what wonderful things a 'New Technology' was about to achieve.  Useful background info about the Chemistry of these cells, too, although i always get funny looks these days when i finally manage to include the word 'stoichiometry' into the conversation!  ;-)

I guess you noticed that my graph above is equivalent to a small section of Fig 5 from your link (albeit my data represents 2 seperate cells, not the same one)

Hi nul-points, oh and i just realized you were quoting crocodile dundee, lol.
Well, i swiped the tv flyback coil/core i had in one of my lamps for testing, as it lighted the led bulb in question to good brightness, though it uses a 30awg. secondary coil.
As i suspected and you must have suspected as well, i need a separate step down transformer in line with the led bulb/secondary coil, since the lithium is not taking the higher voltage charge well, compared to the setup more like yours.
Maybe i will try nimh cells and see how they charge with the higher voltage.
peace love light

Lol, my boys used to love that film - CD: "what day is it Wal?".... Wal: "doesn't know, doesn't care!"

Anyway, where were we?  ...oh yeah - saving the world....

Luke Skywatcher, you be careful with them high voltages! 

I'm not sure that NiMHs would be any more forgiving than Li-ion -  it's all stoichiometry in the end

...hmmm - you see?  'stoichiometry' - conversation killer!

If you think of voltage as 'head of pressure', then you can usefully lose some across the LED stack, just have to make sure you leave around the necessary headroom for pulsing the battery - a series inductor might be your friend here

Alternatively, you could flyback charge, via your LED, the smallest cap which will still store a suitable packet of energy for transfer to the Li-ion and switch a transformer primary across the cap to get turns ratio less volts through some diodes (Schottky) as a charge pulse

Just thinking out loud - i think you're way ahead of me!  :)

 I'm currently going for a clean run on a charge/discharge graph - 23 hours down and if this rate continues it'll be around another day & a half before i can swap the 2 cells.  Meanwhile my LED continues to light up a circle on my ceiling.

 ...it's at times like these that i wish i'd paid more attention at my hand-shadow puppetry classes

np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: SkyWatcher123 on January 13, 2016, 03:41:20 AM
Hi nul-points, goo-day mate, hehe.
No, i actually think i'm getting too far ahead of myself.
Carry on with your version, as it seemed to work the best, as far as my tests have shown.
I'll have to give more thought to the step back down idea.
In the meantime, i ventured back to the Rene re-emf charger idea.
So in my case, 2 lithium cells in series charging directly another lithium cell, with transistor and primary of blocking oscillator in line and of course lighting the led bulb off secondary.
I am swapping the single lithium charging cell periodically with one of the input series cells, it seems to be working well so far.
Anyway, carry on, i don't want to distract further from what you are doing.
peace love light
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 13, 2016, 05:51:40 PM
Hi nul-points, goo-day mate, hehe.
...
I'll have to give more thought to the step back down idea.
In the meantime, i ventured back to the Rene re-emf charger idea.
So in my case, 2 lithium cells in series charging directly another lithium cell, with transistor and primary of blocking oscillator in line and of course lighting the led bulb off secondary.
I am swapping the single lithium charging cell periodically with one of the input series cells, it seems to be working well so far.
...

Ha, g'day Skywatcher

Ok, no worries - i hadn't heard of Rene's charger, but i've seen (and experimented witb) others which use 2 to charge 1

I decided to stick with the same storage size on both i/p & o/p to make it easier to swap the batteries electrically, but otherwise it's the same idea

I like your idea of creating a lantern, or reading lamp - i'm not expecting to get much more than a pocket-flashlight thing going

All the best, keep us posted
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: citfta on January 14, 2016, 03:33:11 PM
Thanks so much for such a simple and worthwhile circuit.  I have mine together and it seems to be working great.  I only had a very small LED so I will be looking for some larger ones to try.  My charge battery is gaining voltage nicely while only drawing 30 ma from the run battery.   Will keep you posted as I learn more.

Thanks again,
Carroll
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 14, 2016, 07:13:26 PM
Thanks so much for such a simple and worthwhile circuit.  I have mine together and it seems to be working great.  I only had a very small LED so I will be looking for some larger ones to try.  My charge battery is gaining voltage nicely while only drawing 30 ma from the run battery.   Will keep you posted as I learn more.

hi Carroll, pleased to hear you've got a circuit going!  I have a couple of circuits running at the moment - one uses a regular panel-mount type LED, hi-brite, that circuit only draws 10+mA but it's still quite bright to look into the lamp - the other circuit has a board-mount 1 Watt LED and can give brighter illumination at higher currents, so this might be a good LED type for you if you want to draw around 30mA

The current draw can be adjusted with VR1, so you can choose the current to suit the LED - obviously the battery discharge time decreases with increased brightness/current, but we're aiming to extend the usefulness of one 'external' charge by recharging 'internally' somewhat (a few times?)

Since the circuit is recharging one battery whilst discharging the other, our external charges shouldn't need to be more  than either:-

a) 1 battery fully charged, one discharged
b) 2 batteries, each half-charged

all the best with your experiments
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: SoManyWires on January 15, 2016, 07:55:21 PM
hi Carroll, pleased to hear you've got a circuit going!  I have a couple of circuits running at the moment - one uses a regular panel-mount type LED, hi-brite, that circuit only draws 10+mA but it's still quite bright to look into the lamp - the other circuit has a board-mount 1 Watt LED and can give brighter illumination at higher currents, so this might be a good LED type for you if you want to draw around 30mA

The current draw can be adjusted with VR1, so you can choose the current to suit the LED - obviously the battery discharge time decreases with increased brightness/current, but we're aiming to extend the usefulness of one 'external' charge by recharging 'internally' somewhat (a few times?)

Since the circuit is recharging one battery whilst discharging the other, our external charges shouldn't need to be more  than either:-

a) 1 battery fully charged, one discharged
b) 2 batteries, each half-charged

all the best with your experiments
np

very nice work there chief!
thankyou for sharing this.

(much applause sound here)
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 16, 2016, 04:43:57 AM
 
thanks SMW, glad you like


ok - here are some preliminary results to see whether this type of approach is worth investigating more

first, a few general observations about the energy capacity of these NiMH cells used here:

- a fully charged cell can provide its Ah rating starting at an initial voltage of approx 1.4V and finishing at a practical discharged voltage of approx 1.2V
*
- a resting terminal voltage of 1.3V represents approx 50% charge remaining in the cell

- with a resistive load, the total energy supplied by these 750mAh cells, between full charge and discharge would be approx 1.3V x 0.75Ah = 0.98 Wh

you can see from the attached graph that Vb2 started and ended at approx 1.3V - therefore it started and finished with an approx 50% charge - its end voltage (1.31V) was only slightly higher than its initial voltage, so i'm going to ignore it in our energy accounting (although it made a real contribution in extending the runtime of the flashlight)

the 'flashlight' was illuminated at the same setting for 96 hours - the average current draw for the circuit was approx 10mA

cell B1 was connected as input for the first 80 hours of operation, and it discharged to 1.3V - this would normally be the 50% charge point, but we can see that this cell started at approx 1.45V, so it may be that it had supplied a little more than 50% of its expected capacity

 by this point, cell B1 had supplied approx 800 mAh, both illuminating the LED and charging cell B2 from 1.3V to 1.35V

After the 80 hour point, cells B1 & B2 were swapped between input & output every 1 or 2 hours, for a further 16 hours

the terminal voltage of cell B1 was recharged back above 1.3V for all of this 16 hour period

so, the outcome of this test was that effectively the length of time before cell B1 terminal voltage fell below 1.3V was extended by at least 16 hours and the total amp-hours supplied to the circuit was 960mAh up to an approx 50% charged point

using an 'area under the curve' calculation, and a dual-slope approximation to the discharge graph, the total energy expended by the flyback flashlight for the duration of the test was approx 1.3Wh - and it only used just over half of the charge in cell B1

when you compare this with the expected total capacity of the cell (ie. a full charge) of approx 1Wh, this approach is definitely worth investigating more!

np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 17, 2016, 09:24:16 PM

Hi null-points,

thanks for the nice little diagram, its indeed a nice weekend project.

I put it together with what i had laying around and it worked straight away.

Toroid is a little yoke, coils 40:120, 0.5mm wire, 2n2222 transistor, 2x 1N5819 diodes, 10K potmeter, 2200uF cap, 2x 2000mAH rechargeables, bright 10mm led.
Yoke has one side isolated with a mylar sheet so there is a gap.

Running for about 12hours now, still going strong (well, the rechargeables are powerfull), i will see how long it goes on.
Screenshot shows the voltage over (yellow), current through (green) and the power (red) in the LED.


Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbWvCAH1aFc&feature=youtu.be


Thanks,  regards Itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 18, 2016, 12:02:11 AM
...,
thanks for the nice little diagram, its indeed a nice weekend project.

I put it together with what i had laying around and it worked straight away.

Toroid is a little yoke, coils 40:120, 0.5mm wire, 2n2222 transistor, 2x 1N5819 diodes, 10K potmeter, 2200uF cap, 2x 2000mAH rechargeables, bright 10mm led.
Yoke has one side isolated with a mylar sheet so there is a gap.
...
Thanks,  regards Itsu

Hej Itsu!

That's a verrrrry nice setup you have there - and i see from your videos that you take your experimentation very seriously!

Thank you for taking the time to make & post a video about my little circuit - i hope that other experimenters, such as youself, find it as interesting (and hopefully useful) as i have

There have been a couple of occasions now, starting with well-rested cells/batteries, where it appeared that after 1 discharge/recharge cycle the 2 terminal voltages had both increased slightly!   I was in the middle of other tests so i just made a mental note to revisit that scenario and be a little more careful in my study of it

I realise that you constructed the circuit with parts to hand - if you decide to spend any time with the circuit, you might be able to make a couple of changes which may improve efficiency slightly

Firstly, some of the 1N58xx Schottky diodes have a fairly significant reverse-leakage current (a characteristic which i've used in some very low-power oscillator circuits) - when it comes to reducing any possible leakage paths around charging circuits, i try to use diodes like these BAT42s

Secondly, the 2N2222 is a dependable workhorse for many circuits, but to maximise gain & switching speed (again, for improved efficiency) i try to use high-gain, high-frequency, higher breakdown voltage devices such as BC547 (i had to settle for BC337 here - i must have eaten all the 547s!)

I'm interested that you picked up on the air-gap - if i remember correctly, Harold claimed that the energy stored increased with gap size, so i've folded some insulating tape to create a gap of approx 2mm  - of course, this creates an angle of contact at the opposite side of the toroid halves, too

My tests, so far, appear to show that the circuit can extend the useful operation for the input charge on the cells/batteries, but it takes a long time to turn results around for each particular test - hence my initial trials using a single 750mAh AAA cell for i/p and for o/p

I've moved on to use a slight variant of the circuit, combining an idea from some earlier work, using an 8 LED head from a commercial flashlight

This latest setup uses a 3 cell battery of NiMH AAAs for i/p (& also for o/p obviously) - current draw for this setup is 65 mA, which will help me get more tests completed per week

I'll be interested to hear your observations, but i hope that this doesn't detract from your other investigations

All the best with your experiments

hej
np
 
(Edit)  PS  my variant circuit is running at approx 40kHz but my intial circuit, which you show, runs at 500kHz - a smaller yoke may give you higher frequency operation, if this can improve efficiency
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 18, 2016, 11:04:07 AM

Hi NP,

thanks for the tips, i have most of the components you mentioned, so will change them after i know how long the present setup will last.

It does not take much efforts to set it up, the toroid is the most time consuming part to build.

This morning (so after again 8 hours) the LED was still on, but the supply battery was at 0.5V  :o , so i switched again and now its at 1.2087V, mostly
recovered by its natural chemical process i guess.   The now run battery is at 1.278V

By the way, the both rechargeables where almost drained when i started, so i am already surprised they last this long.

 
Regards Itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 18, 2016, 01:49:50 PM
@ nul-point and itsu:

May be you have two super caps instead of the two rechargeable batteries. The tests would be much shorter.

I attach the photo of a suitable super cap, but any similar type would work, more or less capacitance, even the 5 Volt types would be good.

The 1 F type super caps are low cost.

With a laboratory power supply or with a 1.5 V battery the super caps should be charged to 1.5 Volt before the test.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 18, 2016, 03:18:15 PM
@ nul-point and itsu:

May be you have two super caps instead of the two rechargeable batteries. The tests would be much shorter.

I attach the photo of a suitable super cap, but any similar type would work, more or less capacitance, even the 5 Volt types would be good.

The 1 F type super caps are low cost.

With a laboratory power supply or with a 1.5 V battery the super caps should be charged to 1.5 Volt before the test.

Greetings, Conrad

hi Conrad

thanks for thinking around the project!

actually, i made my first tests of the circuit using 2 supercap stacks, and last night i started testing with a 1F capacitor as 'B2' - you're correct, the run times are considerably shorter!

thanks for reading & for the suggestions

all the best
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 19, 2016, 07:10:19 PM
@ nul-point and itsu:

May be you have two super caps instead of the two rechargeable batteries. The tests would be much shorter.

I attach the photo of a suitable super cap, but any similar type would work, more or less capacitance, even the 5 Volt types would be good.

The 1 F type super caps are low cost.

With a laboratory power supply or with a 1.5 V battery the super caps should be charged to 1.5 Volt before the test.

Greetings, Conrad

Conrad - you're a Genius!!

When we next meet at the Bierkeller, i owe you a large beer ...and a big kiss!  ;-) 

The supercaps are a perfect demonstration for two reasons:-

a)  you can run 2 tests with the same starting energy each time, one with the full circuit, swapping i/p & o/p and one with just the regular i/p, no o/p storage;

b) you can show clearly that there is no extra charge in the output cap, when you start

and of course the 2 tests only took a total of about 30 minutes, as you implied

I have to go to band practice now, but i hope to upload the 2 graphs later, if not now

I'll explain the details later, for sure, but the graph data shows that the same i/p energy only illuminates the LED for approximately half the time without the output storage swap system - approx 6 minutes compared to approx 12.5 minutes using the full circuit

More later, all the best
np
 

So - here is the result of your suggestion
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 19, 2016, 07:32:49 PM

The supercaps are a perfect demonstration for two reasons:-


Nul-Points you give me too much credit.

It was repeatedly suggested by multiple persons in the past to demonstrate OU with a big electrolytic capacitor or a super cap instead of using batteries, because one can see the result within minutes (instead of many hours or even days).

See for instance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNBi6qoW5SI&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNBi6qoW5SI&feature=youtu.be), Laserhacker runs a pulse motor on a 1000 µF capacitor.

The capacitance of the super cap (1 F, 10 F or 100 F) will define the duration of the test. The smaller the capacitance the shorter the test. Things happen too fast if the test only lasts a few seconds. About two to  five minutes would be practical. Of course one usually does not have man different super caps at home or does nor want to spend too much money buying many different ones.

A OU set up must be able to run from a relatively small super cap (may be 10 F) or one suspects that the OU feature is in the battery (which would be chemistry not electronics).

Many experimenters can not imagine that a Joule Thief type circuit with one LED can run for months with a AA battery. I have a Joule Thief which runs up to 6 months with an AA battery. Of course the red LED is not very bright, but sufficient during the dark to be seen clearly from 10 meters away (in order to give directions).

I am looking forward to your explanations of the graphs.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 20, 2016, 01:28:38 AM
No, i would have continued with my 1 battery, 1 supercap testing, Conrad, if you hadn't suggested replacing both batteries with supercaps

I agree that there are certain aspects of a system which it is easier to quantify using just 'charge', rather than chemistry - and as i was thinking about the possibility of extending the work of which one battery was capable, i moved away from my initial curiosity about the behaviour of the circuit with capacitor storage on both i/p & o/p

So  - i'm very grateful that you made that suggestion ...and that i was also able to get the results so promptly because of it

The upper graph shows the terminal voltages of the i/p & output capacitors (both 1F); in this case the cathode of the LED 'load' is connected to circuit ground, or common, instead of the o/p capacitor, so the o/p current is only used to illuminate the LED - no storage occurs, so the output & input storage cannot be swapped as the test progresses

The blue trace shows the input capacitor get charged to approx 4.9V and as it discharges to 4.6V i connect it to the input of the circuit; the oscillator starts; the LED illuminates; and the input capacitor discharges down to approx 0.6V

At the point when the LED is no longer illuminated, i disconnect the input capacitor and start discharging it, to identify tbe end time of the test run - the duration of LED illumination, without the full circuit, is approx 6 minutes

The lower graph, then, shows the results achieved when the whole circuit is in operation  - the output is also a 1F capacitor, like the input, and the cathode of tbe LED is connected to its positive terminal

As before, the input capacitor gets charged to approx 4.9V and then connected to the input of the circuit when the voltage discharges to 4.6V; the oscillator starts; the LED illuminates; and the input capacitor discharges down to approx 0.42V, whilst the same current passing through the LED charges the output capacitor

At the point when the LED is no longer illuminated, approx 6 minutes after the start of the test run, i toggle switch S1 which swaps the input & output capacitors - the LED now re-illuminates, powered by the charge which has just been received by what was the output capacitor

This second amount of 'charge' illuminates the LED for an extra 4 minutes approximately, and whilst it does this the LED current is now charging the new output capacitor

When the LED is again no longer illuminated, i toggle S1 once more and the capacitors are now back in their original connection; the input capacitor has received some extra charge during the previous swap, the LED re-illuminates and the input capacitor discharges down to 0.6V approx

At this stage, the LED illuminates for a further 2.5 minutes approx  - the total duration of LED illumination, therefore, with this circuit arrangement is 6 + 4 + 2.5 = 12.5 minutes approx

So, this flashlight circuit is capable of extending the useful 'work' done by an input charge of up to 100% approx

Interesting!

Tests continue
np



Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 20, 2016, 02:37:53 AM
So, this flashlight circuit is capable of extending the useful 'work' done by an input charge of up to 100% approx

Interesting!

Nul-Points, now I understand. Really nice this second graph, it shows the story very well. And it looks and sounds plausible. I have never seen before such a clear demonstration of a "battery (or cap) swapping circuit".


I would like to know:

Does the LED shine brighter in case "the cathode of the LED is connected to circuit ground, instead of the o/p capacitor" (first graph) in comparison to the the situation when the "whole circuit is in operation (second graph)?


I suspect:

You could make the circuit (first graph or second graph) run longer by dimming the LED a bit by setting the variable resistor VR1 to a higher resistance. And on the other hand, you could make it run shorter by letting the LED shine a bit brighter by setting the variable resistor VR1 to a lower resistance. All of course only works within certain limits.


Under normal circumstances I would replicate your "flash-light", but at the moment I am very busy with "electrostatic experiments" based on the electrophorus principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrophorus, which is known since 1762. The electrophorus is the intellectual root of all "electrostatic machines". The best web site about electrostatic machines I found is this one: http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acmq/electrostatic.html .

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 20, 2016, 09:00:57 AM
...
I would like to know:

Does the LED shine brighter in case "the cathode of the LED is connected to circuit ground, instead of the o/p capacitor" (first graph) in comparison to the the situation when the "whole circuit is in operation (second graph)?

I suspect:

You could make the circuit (first graph or second graph) run longer by dimming the LED a bit by setting the variable resistor VR1 to a higher resistance. And on the other hand, you could make it run shorter by letting the LED shine a bit brighter by setting the variable resistor VR1 to a lower resistance. All of course only works within certain limits.


...at the moment I am very busy with "electrostatic experiments" based on the electrophorus principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrophorus, which is known since 1762. The electrophorus is the intellectual root of all "electrostatic machines". The best web site about electrostatic machines I found is this one: http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acmq/electrostatic.html .
...

Good question Conrad, difficult to answer objectively!  I'll set up a little DIY illumination tester and get back to you on that


This circuit, in common with most oscillators i suspect, will discharge a battery or capacitor source more or less quickly depending on the drive conditions of the active device - in this case i attempted to adjust the drive to produce the brightest output (since it is nominally a 'flashlight' application), so in one respect the operating conditions are 'optimum', rather than arbitrary

I think that the reported behaviour probably addresses your theory: both tests complete a discharge of the input capacitor (to the point of extinction of the LED) in a period of 6 seconds - i think that this tells us that both tests are having the sane effect on the input energy supply

The difference between the two tests is that in the 2nd test the energy being drawn from the input is diverted into another store and can then be re-used (and this process is repeated a couple of times)

Your own investigations sound interesting - i've seen mention of 'electrophorus' a few times recently so i will extend  my education and read up from those links which you provide - many thanks!

I'll report back if i can get a quantitive answer for you, about the relative illumination levels betwen the 2 tests

All the best
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 20, 2016, 11:03:19 AM

Interesting guys, indeed a good suggestion Conrad about the supercaps.

I stopped my circuit when the NiMH batteries were around 0.6V / 0.9V, but the led was still on.
It had run for about 30 hours (almost depleted batteries to start with).

I have changed the 2n2222 for a BC547 which cleaned up the oscillation signal and its now running with 2 fully charged 750mAh NIMH's
I had to order the BAT42's as i did not have them, so will redo the test when they arrive.
I will also incorperate the supercap setup as i have 10 10F / 2.7V supercaps, so i will split them in 2x 5 (50F) parallel.

One thing i noticed is that it seems that the led pulled 16mW, while neither battery was supplying that amount of power.
But it is difficult to make accurate measurements with such low voltage/current levels so will need to redo that to.

Another interesting thing would be to check if the resonance frequency has any influence on the workings of the used yoke/toroid.
Maybe at a certain resonance frequency it will co-resonante and lower the losses even further.

 
Thanks,  itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 20, 2016, 02:33:50 PM
i think that extending operation/increasing efficiency of a circuit using battery energy is a good long-term goal (which is why i initially moved to the 2 battery setup) - however, it's looking like we need to start getting a better measure of the quantities of energy being transferred & converted, to see if & where any gains are being made

i was very encouraged to see the results of the 2 capacitor tests to get some clear indication that the general principle works - and works well

pleased to hear that a BC547 has given you improved switching over the 2N2222, the BAT42s may not make such a visible difference but they should reduce any leakage currents you may have had from the 1N58xx devices

the supercaps will be a good move i think - i've started to experiment with battery i/p & supercap o/p and i think we can still achieve similar efficiency gains with this method (and therefore not need to double up the number of batteries/cells we're using)

i've also been using the circuit at higher voltages (more cells - more LEDs) - a move like this may help you, too, with power measurements

for higher supply voltages i've added a BAT42 between base & common (cathode to base) of Q1, to clamp the drive voltage swing to the base, to avoid any zener breakdown effects - this seems to have improved efficiency at these increased voltages, too

another small change has been to reduce the buffer capacitance and split its location - i reduced the 1500uF electrolytic cap to a 100uF Tantalum and placed it in parallel with D1 & the input supply, and i now only have 0.33uF of non-polar capacitance decoupling the supply to the oscillator on the T1 side of L1

these values may well be suited to my particular L1 & T1 values, so you may need to 'select-on-test', if you wish to try these mods - your comments about resonance are very relevant here, and i suspect that in general the higher frequency of the oscillator will be better

interesting about the LED power measurements - as a *very* approximate rule-of-thumb, your scope traces show the flyback current/voltage spikes as a right-angle triangle so the average E & I values will be (50% of their height x duty cycle), if that helps you double-check the scope power values?

thanks to all you guys reading & experimenting with this circuit, for feedback, ideas & shared results
np

Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 21, 2016, 08:41:20 AM
Responding to your earlier question about comparative illumination levels of the LED between the two tests, Conrad:

I had to make a visual comparison because i haven't yet found the parts i've used  before to compare LED light levels between pulsed and DC operation a few years back - so - visually there doesn't seem to be a marked difference between the tests

Its difficult to give a more useful visual comparison because of course in both cases the supply voltage gradually decreases through the duration of each test anyway - in the case of the swapped devices circuit, the LED becomes brighter again as each swap is made, then decreases as before

Of course, the test conditions are quite artificial, because in normal use as a flashlight the battery supply voltage only decreases very slowly by comparison with the test capacitor


I realised on re-reading your post just now, to answer your illumination question, that i misunderstood your comment about run duration - i originally thought you were referring to the test conditions but i think now that you meant in general - so, yes, i plan to make the variable resistor available as a control - the user can then choose to make the illumination/duration trade-off to suit the needs of the moment

I looked up your electrophorus link to the examples site - very interesting!   I think that there are more connections between 'contact voltage', Galvanic voltage, and electrostatic behaviour than is widely known or accepted in mainstream science.  It seems to me that these are just another way of tapping into the inherent energies which bind matter together, and which we also see becoming accessible through LENR type processes (eg our own Prof Steven Jones, Rossi, and Fleichmann & Pons)

So - cool- electrostatics -  a  very interesting area of study, and not too far separated from the radiant energy collector device of Tesla - kudos!

All the best with your investigations, Conrad
np

Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: TinselKoala on January 21, 2016, 08:55:56 AM
Re the issue of judging LED brightness...

I've recently been making some electricity-to-light efficiency tests and it's surprising how much actual brightness change has to happen before the eye can detect it purely visually.

I'm using an Extech LT300 light meter and a box which keeps the light sensor and the light source under test separated by a fixed, standard distance and excludes other light.  Here's the "unboxing" video I made when I first received the Extech meter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iulxcqg5USk
(I don't show any efficiency tests in this video, it's just unboxing and testing the meter for operation.)

My experience with this meter and the LED efficiency tests I've been doing have really made me realize that it is absolutely essential to use sensitive instruments, rather than "eyeballing", to measure brightness of LEDs, whether pulsed like with a JT or with steady DC. This is also true of incandescent filaments. The eye is incredibly "non-linear" in response to brightness. Sometimes I've seen 30 percent difference in actual measured brightness when to the eye the brightness levels can look nearly the same.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 21, 2016, 02:18:42 PM
I had to make a visual comparison because i haven't yet found the parts i've used  before to compare LED light levels between pulsed and DC operation a few years back - so - visually there doesn't seem to be a marked difference between the tests

I realised on re-reading your post just now, to answer your illumination question, that i misunderstood your comment about run duration - i originally thought you were referring to the test conditions but i think now that you meant in general - so, yes, i plan to make the variable resistor available as a control - the user can then choose to make the illumination/duration trade-off to suit the needs of the moment

@Nul-Points

My argument concerning LED brightness is the following: if one stores some energy for later use (by swapping the batteries) the LED will shine dimmer. In other words, the total light output is about the same whether on has the LED shine brighter for a shorter time (your test without energy storage) or one has it shine less bright for a longer time (your test with battery swapping).

May be one can just as well forget "battery swapping" by just having the LED shine less brightly (by setting the variable resistor at the base to a higher value or by making the ON-pulses shorter by help of some circuitry at the base of the transistor). I got very good results by carefully switching the transistor with a microprocessor (adjusting pulse frequency and pulse width to some optimum). This only made sense when driving CFLs (compact fluorescent lamps) or many LEDs. This principle is used in modern LED drivers which adjust the Voltage over the LEDs to adjust the light-colour temperature (which changes when the LEDs warm up) and pulse frequency and pulse width are changed  to allow for dimming. So, to optimally drive LEDs one best uses a microprocessor.  http://www.ti.com/general/docs/lit/getliterature.tsp?baseLiteratureNumber=snvy001

Yes, my comment about the variable resistor was meant "generally". The variable resistor at the base of the transistor defines (within limits) the switching, mostly the length of the ON-pulses and as such the amount of energy flowing through the LED (which is the brightness).

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 21, 2016, 02:34:34 PM

I've recently been making some electricity-to-light efficiency tests and it's surprising how much actual brightness change has to happen before the eye can detect it purely visually.

I'm using an Extech LT300 light meter and a box which keeps the light sensor and the light source under test separated by a fixed, standard distance and excludes other light.

J.L. Naudin had to use a light meter in a box to see that the KAPAGEN was not OU:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/ (http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/)

http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/kapagen33io.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/kapagen33io.htm)

http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/kapagen33pio.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/kapagen33pio.htm)

Also the calibration was very important.


It is not easy to do meaningful measurements with a light meter. May be comparing the same light source under different drive conditions (in a box) is feasible. But the value of such a measurement will only be a "comparison", no absolute values.

Be aware of the following "feature" of the LT300: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space) (CIE standard observer)

This is why I never bought a light meter. But they have become much cheaper and it is interesting to play with such a device.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 21, 2016, 11:04:05 PM
Interesting diversion - thanks for your various inputs there, guys

Conrad is absolutely correct.....

...we don't need to know absolute values if we're comparing results in the same context


So - no need to hypothesize any further - the photometric intensity results are in!

As you would expect, the initial LED intensity is very close for both tests:- LED to ground; LED charging output cap - (because of course the output cap to be charged is at ground potential, initially)

The grounded LED peak intensity is slightly smaller at 98.5% of the full circuit peak intensity

But what about the average light intensity for each test?

If Conrad's theory is true  - ie. that the reason the full circuit illuminates the LED twice as long as the grounded LED is because the LED is dimmer,  then the grounded LED should have an average intensity about 2x the average of the full circuit LED

Here are the photometric intensity profiles for the initial 360 seconds of the two tests - remember that after 360 seconds the grounded LED has discharged the input source and stops illuminating, as expected;   however, in the full circuit, not only has the same amount of input energy been transferred via the LED but its current has also been used to charge the output cap and therefore the input & output storage devices can be swapped to allow the LED to continue its illumination ( & this process can be repeated one or more times, depending on the supply voltage & load current)

So - is one of the intensity averages 50% of the other?  NO!

The dimmer of the two tests is 92% of the other - they are approximately the same! 

I'll let any visitors here decide for themselves which profile is the grounded LED test and which is the full circuit test

These results are showing that, since energy cannot be destroyed, if we are careful about how we transfer energy from one store to another (ie. reducing the conversion of energy into a state which leaves our system) then we can use the energy transfer to perform work on each pass

This circuit is based on the principle that Energy is conserved - Work is not

Thanks for reading, testing continues
np

Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 22, 2016, 01:39:10 AM
So - no need to hypothesize any further - the photometric intensity results are in!

As you would expect, the initial LED intensity is very close for both tests:- LED to ground; LED charging output cap - (because of course the output cap to be charged is at ground potential, initially)

The grounded LED peak intensity is slightly smaller at 98.5% of the full circuit peak intensity

Here are the photometric intensity profiles for the initial 360 seconds of the two tests - remember that after 360 seconds the grounded LED has discharged the input source and stops illuminating, as expected;   however, in the full circuit, not only has the same amount of input energy been transferred via the LED but its current has also been used to charge the output cap and therefore the input & output storage devices can be swapped to allow the LED to continue its illumination ( & this process can be repeated one or more times, depending on the supply voltage & load current)

So - is one of the intensity averages 50% of the other?  NO!

The dimmer of the two tests is 92% of the other - they are approximately the same! 

These results are showing that, since energy cannot be destroyed, if we are careful about how we transfer energy from one store to another (ie. reducing the conversion of energy into a state which leaves our system) then we can use the energy transfer to perform work on each pass

This circuit is based on the principle that Energy is conserved - Work is not

@Nul-Points:

Very nice result and I am glad that you have proven me wrong. It is a good result, that one can store part of the energy for later use without dimming the LED.

I have to think why that seems to, but your test and the two graphs seem to tell the right story. I wonder where the energy goes if the LED is grounded? Something must become warmer?

If your result is correct it also means that one can make a pulse motor more efficient by feeding the back EMF pulse to a second battery (or cap) for later use (like swapping power source and storage).

And I wonder if one could feed back the back EMF directly to the drive battery in order to draw less power? The LED would shine longer without swapping batteries. Gyula posted the attached circuit in an other thread (as a principle, the important component is the bifilar wound coil, which would mean a third winding in the LED circuit). May be Gyula is reading this and would like to comment?

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 22, 2016, 02:00:23 AM
Well, I thought about this strange similar light intensity graphs and came to a conclusion:

To make a meaningful comparison and to test what I meant, one should not ground the LED but put it how I show in the attached circuit.

So, test one: the LED is put in the place as I show in the attached circuit. Make the power graph till the LED goes out and make the light intensity graph.

Test two: the full circuit (with storage cap) is used and the power graph and the light intensity graph are already done. It is not necessary to this test again.

In this way we have a "true" comparison between a "normal circuit" and a "swapping circuit".

In the "swapping circuit" the LED is driven with the back EMF, but in a "normal circuit" one would drive the LED directly (as shown in the attached circuit).

And in the normal circuit the LED will be brighter for the same power draw as in the "swapping circuit". But the comparison is difficult, because it is difficult to cause the same power draw in both circuits.

The error in Nul-Point`s comparison and arguments: he always drives the LED with the back EMF and for sure, it always has the same brightness and a similar power draw occurs in the initial phase in both cases.

And I claim: even with Gyula's idea one can not feed back the back EMF (or swap it) in order to gain something. And in Nul-Points circuit one can light the LED longer (by swapping the batteries) but dimmer for the same power draw as in a "normal circuit". There are no miracles, and I started to believe in miracles for a few minutes till I came to my senses again.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: citfta on January 22, 2016, 02:24:19 AM
Hi np,

Thanks again for this nifty little circuit.  I am still playing around with mine and trying different LEDs and also tried the super caps except my "super" caps from China weren't so super.  They had a lot of internal leakage so that test was a failure.  I need to get some more super caps to try.

What you are doing with this circuit is what David Bowling has been talking about for the past few years.  You can conserve energy by running it into a load and charging another battery at the same time.  In the original 3 battery generating system as proposed by John Bedini there were 2 batteries connected in series and then to a load and the other side of the load went to a third battery that was connected with the polarity opposite the other two.  While drawing power from the two in series you were also charging the third battery.  As one of the two in series dropped in charge you then swapped it out for the fresh charged one.  Of course they all eventually went down,  BUT the run times were much longer than if the load was merely run off the 3 batteries connected in parallel.

As we have continued our testing we are now using a voltage boost module to raise the voltage so we can run a load and charge another battery using only one primary battery.  Almost identical to what you are doing only on a larger scale.  We are using as our load a scooter motor turning a generator to charge another battery or to run some other load.  We are getting very long run times by swapping the 2 batteries back and forth.  You can get even better performance by using one extra battery so that the one that has just been charged can rest before going back into the system.

No we don't have OU yet but any system that can extend your run time from the batteries by several times normal is worth seeing how far we can push it.

Carroll
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 22, 2016, 08:36:35 AM
Hi guys, first of all, thanks as always for your input

I think its time to address a few possible misconceptions....

Conrad,  i do see a flaw in the capacitor to capacitor tests ...but it may not be the one you imagined - my circuit has been intentionally arranged to ensure that the LED only conducts with flyback energy

The clue is in the naming: 'flyback flashlight'

Your proposed replacement of the LED will not work for any supply voltage below the effective forward voltage of the LED + circuit voltage drops (eg. 'On' voltage of Q1, IxR drop of L1, T1, etc)

In order to try and present a complete test, using the shorter runtimes which a supercap would provide, i was diverted away from my original requirement for LED biasing which ensured it received only flyback drive

I could repeat the test with the output capacitor pre-charged to match the input, as only this will be a true representation of a regular operating condition for my circuit but your proposed re-arrangement of the circuit is unsuitable as the white LEDs won't light at all for supply voltages below and away from their forward voltage (say below 2.5V approx?)


Carroll, thanks for the update, i'm pleased to hear that the David Bowling thread is actually producing some useful end-results

Maybe i need to repeat a statement near the beginning of my first post in this thread "Ok, nothing novel, there - except...."

I'm not claiming any originality for this concept here - these ideas go back a LONG way, well before Mr Bowling or i turned up on the scene!  :-)

The "except..." there refers to the fact that i've been measuring real gains with this circuit, whereas i've tried many times to get anything useful from the classic 'charge 2 parallel batteries from 2 in series" and also 'charge 1 battery from 2 in series' type approaches

...for example, in Prof Jones thread, back in 2011:
  http://overunity.com/10773/physicsprof-steven-e-jones-circuit-shows-8x-overunity/msg301808/#msg301808

That's great that you're finding real gains with that approach, i'd given up on it  :-)


This particular circuit, here and now, is my own development - a slightly ironic response to apparently over-hyped claims of OU flashlights for sale and horrendously over-complex (and under-unity?)  'self-running lanterns'

I wanted to show that you can achieve real gains with a fairly simple circuit, and as Itsu said it can be built and running over a weekend!

I try to provide a slightly different approach in my threads - low on hype, heavy on data, full-disclosure of circuit details

I've started to investigate the circuit performance in more detail, and on the basis of what i'm seeing, i plan various developments, not just flashlight/lantern applications

I'll just carry on - doing what i'm doing - and sharing what i'm finding with anybody who is interested in the same things


I wish you all you guys good success with your individual endeavours
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 22, 2016, 11:45:51 AM

Ok,  i see i am falling behind in this thread, but my bat42 just arrived.   I will catch up later today.

I made a pcb with the 2x bat42's, BC547, 10x 10F supercaps, 100K pot, 10mm led, 100uF buffercap.
The 10x 10F supercaps a divided 2x 5 in series making 2 stacks of 2F caps, backed/loaded by 2x 750mAH 1.2V rechargeables for now.

I made a video of this, kind of in a hurry and unprepared, so it looks clumsy, sorry about that.

First 3 minutes describe/shows this new setup.
Then i show/measure something i don't understand (led pulls 5mW, while neither battery/supercap seems to supply this)
From 13 minutes into the video on, i show the rundown of the circuit with the 2x 2F supercaps only.

No free lunch here as expected.

Video here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAa-AAEWXv8&feature=youtu.be

I have some screenshots of the power calculations on the led, and both batteries if needed.
Where does the power come from powering the led?  Is it because its kind of floating compared to ground, so a measuring error?

Regards Itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 22, 2016, 02:12:01 PM
No we don't have OU yet but any system that can extend your run time from the batteries by several times normal is worth seeing how far we can push it.

The problem is the comparison circuit. You say, that you can push the run time. That may well be, but you push it in comparison to what circuit? You push run time in comparison to what alternative?

If the goal is run time mainly disregarding LED brightness, longer run times can be achieved.

If the goal is "most light for the least input",  a circuit (although it pushes run time) might be a looser.

Like in all endeavours, success depends on the definition of the goal.


@Nul-Points:

You are of course right, my placement of the LED was not good for lower supply Voltages! It was late and I was not thinking straight. Sorry!

First argument: I do not know whether "grounding the LED" is the right comparison circuit in respect to your "full circuit". I suspect it is not, but I can not point out a good comparison circuit for supply Voltages from 2.2 Volt down to 0.6 Volt. May be I get an idea later on.

Second argument: For supply Voltages from 5 Volt down to 2.2 V I think I have found a good comparison circuit, which I attached. The important point is that the variable resistor is set to a value which makes the LED shine at 5 V as bright as in your "full circuit" at 5 Volt. From your graphs I take the Value of "0,4" for light brightness at 5 Volt (supply Voltage) for your "full circuit".

From your graphs we already have the data for your "full circuit", which is "LED brightness curve from 5 Volt to 2.2 Volt" and "run time from 5 Volt to 2.2 Volt". Now it would be nice to have this data also for the very simple comparison circuit.

The very simple comparison circuit would be the "normal way" of driving a LED which then can be compared (concerning LED brightness and run time) with your "full circuit". Unfortunately only from 5 Volt down to 2.2 Volt.

@Itsu and all thinkers:

Let's compare Nul-Point`s two alternatives, his "full circuit" and his "LED grounded circuit". My question: where does the energy go if the LED is grounded in comparison to the energy which goes into the storage battery (or cap)?

The run time in the "LED grounded circuit" is shorter and LED brightness is comparable for the initial duration. Where does the energy god if not into the LED? But the LED is not brighter?


@Nul-Points:

My ramblings are not intended as criticism. You have such nice measuring possibilities (data logger and LED brightness), therefore I see a chance that you can clarify many questions (and some of my questions might be stupid).

It is always difficult to follow the "energy". And like in all ways of life, what is compared to what? One should not compare apples and oranges.


Most efficient way of driving a LED in terms of most light output for the smallest energy input:

Adjust the power supply to a value (around 3 Volt) so that the LED in series with a 5 Ohm resistor gets exactly its nominal current (depending on the size of the LED between 20 mA and 200 mA, for some very small LEDs it is only 2 mA to 5 mA).
That is the "ultimate comparison circuit" for any LED driver circuit.

There is of course the practical wish to use a battery which Voltage decreases over time. There might be the wish to use only one 1.5 V battery, which makes an oscillating circuit necessary (to lift the Voltage to at least 3 V for the LED).

I would say that the oscillating circuit costs energy in comparison to the "ultimate comparison circuit". Some energy will be lost in the oscillation components (coils, transistor) and I suspect that the LED suffers (will break sooner) if driven by spikes much higher than 3 Volt.

I also would say that a battery stays about 90% of its run time between 1.5 and 1.0 Volt. Then it runs down quickly to near 0 Volt. Is it worth while to design a circuit for less than 1.0 Volt (it would only last 10% longer than a simpler circuit which works between 1.5 V and 1.0 V).

The simplest way of driving a LED pretty efficiently: use three AA batteries in series (they will start out at 4.5 Volt and run down slowly to 3 Volt in 90% of their run time), choose a resistor in series with the LED, so that the LED has its nominal current at 4.5 Volt. It is hard to beat that very simple circuit in terms of run time and light output per energy input.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 22, 2016, 03:08:01 PM

Where does the power come from powering the led?  Is it because its kind of floating compared to ground, so a measuring error?


I watched your latest video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAa-AAEWXv8&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAa-AAEWXv8&feature=youtu.be).

Very nice setup!

I am sure you will find the right setting for your scope to measure the input power.

It may be, that the Current probe and the Voltage probe do not have the same ground while measuring the input Wattage?

The oscillations of the circuit might influence the ground of one of the probes and I suspect it is the Current probe, because it is an active one (while the Voltage probe is comparatively simple in terms of electronics).

Whenever I do scope measurements I find a new way of making errors. An electronics professor once told me that "measuring technique" is the high art in electronics and separates the masters from the apprentices. I am definitely a beginner apprentice. The better the scope the more errors one can make.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 23, 2016, 01:25:26 PM
I feel that it's necessary to make the following statement below, BEFORE it becomes a necessity - i am grateful to ALL the members who have contributed so far - each have made some positive contribution in one way or another.  I have seen on previous threads (of my own and other members) how the main focus of the thread can get diverted and obscured by 'straw men' arguments, irrelevant comments and a high-jacking of the thread-owner's intended test 'plans', therefore...

****************
PLEASE NOTE:-

SINCE THIS THREAD DOESN'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF MODERATION, I ASK YOU POLITELY TO KEEP YOUR POSTS TERSE AND TECHNICAL, RELATING DIRECTLY TO DATA AND CIRCUIT INFORMATION PRESENTED BY MEMBERS WHO ARE TESTING REPLICATIONS OF THIS CIRCUIT

IF YOU WISH TO INTRODUCE AN ISSUE WHICH ISN'T EITHER A COMMENT ON DATA SHOWN OR AN ANSWER TO A QUESTION POSED BY A CIRCUIT BUILDER, THEN PLEASE  P.M.  ME TO DISCUSS IT FIRST

REMEMBER THAT THE PEOPLE AT THE BENCH WILL HAVE THEIR OWN 'SCHEDULE' OF TESTS PLANNED - PLEASE RESPECT THEIR JUDGEMENT AND PLANS BEFORE INSISTING THAT CERTAIN TESTS BE CARRIED OUT

EVERYONE IS WELCOME TO THEIR OPINIONS, BUT THEY REMAIN OPINIONS UNTIL PROVED OR DISPROVED BY DATA - THIS IS NOT THE THREAD TO AIR OPINIONS WHICH AREN'T A DIRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA SHOWN

IF YOU BELIEVE STRONGLY ENOUGH THAT THE TESTS REPORTED HERE ARE MISTAKEN, MISDIRECTED OR MISINFORMED THEN GO AND START YOUR OWN THREAD, CREATE AN EXPERIMENT AND REPORT YOUR DATA

ANYONE WHO APPEARS TO ME TO BE IGNORING THIS POLITE REQUEST WILL FIND THAT I NOT ONLY REPAY THEIR EVIDENT RESPECT BY IGNORING THEIR POST(S) BUT ALSO WILL LIKELY TREAT THEM TO SOME OF MY ASCERBIC WIT INTO THE BARGAIN  ...(I AM OLD AND UGLY AND I NO LONGER GIVE A D@MN !)

YOUR 'VISIBILITY' HERE WILL BE DEEMED TO BE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ABOVE 'GROUND RULES'

OK - LET'S CONTINUE
**********************
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 24, 2016, 03:49:56 AM
I had some time, while my planned Friday overnight test was running into yesterday, to think about your original LED intensity question, Conrad

We know that there's no point trying to compare the circuit LED drive level witb a DC test setup because of course by the very nature of a pulse circuit, we have a duty cycle - and since this is a flashlight, and not a piece of test equipment, say, our user requirement is just that the flashlight should be 'bright enough' to illuminate what we need to see in the dark - our brain doesn't care if our eyes happen to think that two different Lumen levels appear to be the same, as long as we can avoid stepping on our pet armadillo in our back yard, at night

So - our comparison should certainly test LED intensity from two drive signals 'chopped' at the same periods; and then we want to compare the intensity with, and without accompanying storage

The previous tests were close to what we wanted, but not quite there - due to the initial voltage of 4.5V on the supply cap, the LED was initially bypassing the pulse operation for both test setups (hence the odd 'double-peak' start to the intensity profile);  only after this initial current surge for both test conditions did the supply voltage discharge below the effective forward voltage for the LED at around 2.5V

Using an initial supply voltage just below 2.5V, i've been able to repeat the tests and still get sufficient intensity to provide useful photometric data - the peak level and the duration of illumination will both be reduced of course, so the final values for average intensity will be significantly less, too

The graphs below show the valid results for what we wanted to compare earlier - Conrad, i'm sure you'll be pleased to find that the you were correct in thinking that the average LED intensity of this 'storage' circuit is less than that for the grounded LED which just allows the output energy to deplete the supply directly

The peak intensity is still the same for both conditions, as i explained in the first attempt at this comparison

However, you may be surprised to find that the difference in average intensity between the two conditions is only 20% (average photometric intensity levels were 0.04 & 0.05, respectively, for the 'storage' and 'grounded' setups)

So the doubling of illumination runtime in this storage circuit cannot be anywhere near explained by a reduced illumination level

An interesting test, thank you Conrad

np


Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 25, 2016, 01:16:41 PM
... my bat42 just arrived...

I made a pcb with the 2x bat42's, BC547, 10x 10F supercaps, 100K pot, 10mm led, 100uF buffercap.
The 10x 10F supercaps a divided 2x 5 in series making 2 stacks of 2F caps, backed/loaded by 2x 750mAH 1.2V rechargeables for now.

...

Where does the power come from powering the led?  Is it because its kind of floating compared to ground, so a measuring error?

Regards Itsu

...a few comments on points you raised (here or on the vid):

- the BAT42s will only make an improvement in the efficiency if the 1N58xx Schottkys were leaky
- the LED is clamped to the common line by the BAT42 at its anode, so there won't be a floating measurement type issue with the LED power reading (more likely, i guess is that you're not getting a good value for the supply power (may need a CSR inline with the input & get the scope to do math on that?)

timed measurements of a set voltage discharge from a (measured/calculated) i/p supercap should confirm i/p power nicely

Conrad, re. some of your suggestions above, i developed this circuit initially with a pulse motor towards the end of last year and have some results from that which i may be able to add here - also used the circuit just to feed back to the supply;

the question is not, i believe, what happened to the extra energy, in the case of the grounded LED (that circuit arrangement just feeds the current straight back into the supply where it depletes the source 'charge' (aka 'gorge') on the i/p capacitor, as in conventional supply-circuit-load arrangements - no, the question should be 'how has the use of the input energy been extended?', and i believe that the answer is that the energy is still in 'transit', as it were, on the way back to the supply, but has been diverted into temporary storage before being re-used for more work on the return journey


hope this helps address some points raised - thanks all
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 25, 2016, 06:42:44 PM
Today I saw three different LED-flash-lights in a local shop.

The prices are in Euro and all had the three batteries (3 times 1.5 V AA, or 1.5 V AAA = 4.5 Volt supply, the two round lights in a package had 6 x 1,5 V AAA = 2 times 4.5 V) included.

That seems to be the market to compete with. And without batteries one gets these LED flash-lights even cheaper. It seems that "brightness" is the desired goal, not so much "run time". Of course one would like both, but to increase "run time" one has chosen LEDs with higher light output (per Watt) and not a more complicated circuit.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 25, 2016, 10:58:47 PM
...
That seems to be the market to compete with. And without batteries one gets these LED flash-lights even cheaper. It seems that "brightness" is the desired goal, not so much "run time". Of course one would like both, but to increase "run time" one has chosen LEDs with higher light output (per Watt) and not a more complicated circuit.
...

That's certainly a good representation of the current market - both for the flashlight itself, and the cells (usually primary, eg alkaline)

I see a niche market for something a bit smarter than just a plain flashlight, though - i think people would be willing to pay more for a device which is rechargeable (say solar + micro USB?), has a control to optimise either intensity or duration, is efficient ...and can be used to recharge a variety of portable devices  eg. phones/tablets etc,  via a standard USB outlet

C'mon, Conrad, even you would pay 30 Euros for a tool like that!  ;-)

All the best
np

PS  i'm currently using one of those circular 24 LED units above as my LED head - works well with 2 or 3 AAA cells - today i used it with 3 cells i/p to recharge the 9V NiMH for my DVM (obviously the flashlight had energy left afterwards, i was just using its capability to charge an output battery which is 2-3x the i/p battery voltage)



Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: TinselKoala on January 26, 2016, 05:49:42 AM
Quote
The simplest way of driving a LED pretty efficiently: use three AA batteries in series (they will start out at 4.5 Volt and run down slowly to 3 Volt in 90% of their run time), choose a resistor in series with the LED, so that the LED has its nominal current at 4.5 Volt. It is hard to beat that very simple circuit in terms of run time and light output per energy input.

Greetings, Conrad

Actually... the series resistor has two faults: First, it dissipates power itself, and second, as the supply voltage changes, the current through the LED and resistor changes, hence the brightness of the LED changes.

It is actually "simpler" (for some values of simpler) and more efficient to use a linear current sink instead of the resistor. The AP2502 that I have been playing with for some time is such a device. This 4-channel linear device is more efficient than a series resistor and keeps a constant current of 20 mA (or 40 or 60 or 80 mA) through an LED as long as the supply voltage is over the LED's forward voltage. It even works well with pulsed JT type circuits. It has an "Enable" pin that can be used with the usual PWM scheme to vary LED brightness consistently. The advantages are that it does not waste power the way a resistor does, and it keeps the current (and hence the LED brightness) constant as the power supply voltage varies. The disadvantage is that it comes in a SOT-23-6 package!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9wxuRZV-Ro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9wxuRZV-Ro)

In terms of LED efficiency (lumens per watt of electrical power) it is hard to beat the Philips LumiLEDs. See the data sheet below:
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 26, 2016, 06:27:42 AM

Thanks for those tips, TK, i'll check out the specs

np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 28, 2016, 07:14:33 PM

Back on track after some PC problems.


I still had my bat42 setup running from the first battery (750mAH) after 1 week, so i have interrupted it to
make a new setup using some 3V/3W leds powered by 2x  4 2000mAH NiMh in series providing 2x 5.5V.

I made a blackbox in which i have tested one of the 3W leds and calibrated it using DC from my bench PS.

So now i can crosscheck the measured power calculated by my scope with the equivalent DC power from a graph i have made.
It turns out to be fairly accurate.

Video here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyOTWG0F914

I will do some run down tests with the filled up supercaps only.
The blackbox also enables me to find the max output on a given frequency at the lowest possible input.


Regards Itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 29, 2016, 05:40:39 AM
...
I still had my bat42 setup running from the first battery (750mAH) after 1 week, so i have interrupted it to
make a new setup using some 3V/3W leds powered by 2x  4 2000mAH NiMh in series providing 2x 5.5V.

I made a blackbox in which i have tested one of the 3W leds and calibrated it using DC from my bench PS.

So now i can crosscheck the measured power calculated by my scope with the equivalent DC power from a graph i have made.
It turns out to be fairly accurate.

Video here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyOTWG0F914

I will do some run down tests with the filled up supercaps only.
The blackbox also enables me to find the max output on a given frequency at the lowest possible input.
....

Nice work Itsu - good progress!

If, as you say, you're getting good agreement between scope math value for LED power and the DC Equivalent reading from your photosensor graph, then my earlier comment appears to hold true about the mismatch you reported between measured values for LED power compared with i/p supply, that it was more likely that the scope LED power value was the more accurate

You mention that your 750mAh i/p cell has been running for a week - using 'ball-park' figures, i/p cell was approx discharged at end of run (1.18V), although these pulse circuits can extract almost the last 'drops' of energy from cells (and continue to operate down to approx 0.5V or less); the o/p cell is showing almost fully charged at 1.4:V (some of which could be 'phantom' charge, of course!)

If your mention of 'running for a week' is indeed 7 days non-stop operation, then as an order of magnitude the LED was running for 7×24h at approx 16mW average, ie. approx 2700mWh 

i think i calculated in an earlier post that a 750mAh NiMH cell would store approx 1000mWh of energy

So your circuit appears to have achieved some interesting efficiency, if these numbers hold true, to both run at that power and, in addition, to charge the o/p cell

Is that correct?

Thanks for sharing
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 29, 2016, 11:28:04 AM

Hi NP,

Yes, it seems that this way of checking on the led power consumption agrees with what my scope calculates.
Around 32mW with this new heavy duty setup, but still when measuring the individual battery/supercap stacks it does not add up.

So i still make some measurement error there (allthough i also used a csr in the battery lead which makes it even more confusing) or the signals (pulses) interfere somehow.
It annoys me that i do not get any logical data out of this setup.


Anyway, with the old setup it was running for a week, but i am not sure about the 16mW consumption of that 10mm led.
It might have been for a short while with fully charged batteries, but it will drop fast till about 5mW when the supply battery get lower.
Perhaps i could retry that setup with the blackbox attached (have to calibrate that led first) to see how fast the power drops off.

Thats the problem with batteries, they can decive you easily.


More to come,   regards Itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 29, 2016, 03:57:56 PM
...
Yes, it seems that this way of checking on the led power consumption agrees with what my scope calculates.
Around 32mW with this new heavy duty setup, but still when measuring the individual battery/supercap stacks it does not add up.

So i still make some measurement error there (allthough i also used a csr in the battery lead which makes it even more confusing) or the signals (pulses) interfere somehow.
...
Anyway, with the old setup it was running for a week, but i am not sure about the 16mW consumption of that 10mm led.

It might have been for a short while with fully charged batteries, but it will drop fast till about 5mW when the supply battery get lower.

Perhaps i could retry that setup with the blackbox attached (have to calibrate that led first) to see how fast the power drops off.

Thats the problem with batteries, they can decive you easily.
...

Lol, yes, tricky beasts, batteries!  But they can still give up some of their secrets to us - we just have to be trickier than them  ;-)

I wouldn't expect the LED current draw to change very much over a test run - we're only discharging  the input cell in that 1st test by approx 0.25V, equivalent to a drain from max voltage to around 80%

In my supercap rundown illumination tests you can see that the illumination level is almost constant for the first 40 seconds or so, while the supply volts drop from max to aprox 60% - this is a significantly greater difference in voltage to our tests with NiMH input supply

Hopefully, if you're able to repeat the 1 cell test with your photometer box, this will confirm the power profile - if the LED power is fairly constant (or just reasonably linear) then we can apply the maths in my previous post with an average value for the LED power and the run time to find the total energy converted by the LED

Finding the amount of energy in the output cell, due to charging, could be determined by an initial full charge, then time a discharge from max to 1.2V  into a measured resistor (say 20ohms, .5W or 1W). This enables a calc of an approx capacity of the cell.  The energy in subsequent charges of that cell can be compared by discharging the result through the same resistor and using the time to reach 1.2V as a proportion of the time to discharge the full cell

Obviously this is quite time consuming (but it works), so better to try & get the test equipment to agree with each other about measuring equivalent values !

I think you've made a very useful addition to your test bench with your blackbox - i'm inspired to use one of those solar cells like yours, in place of my photodiode, when comparing brighter sources

Hope you have a more productive weekend than last - PCs can be a real pain in the butt when Windoze goes AWOL !

All the best with your experimenting
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: conradelektro on January 29, 2016, 05:12:42 PM
So i still make some measurement error there (allthough i also used a csr in the battery lead which makes it even more confusing) or the signals (pulses) interfere somehow.
It annoys me that i do not get any logical data out of this setup.

@itsu:

I watched your video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyOTWG0F914 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyOTWG0F914) and extracted the attached picture.

Thinking about your measurement problem (illogical result) it comes to my mind, that the only cause could be the board with the caps (see arrow on the picture).

There seems to be an unintended partial short or a cross-connection between input and output on this board. If it is not too much work, a separation of the input caps and the output caps onto two separated boards would be a prudent measure? Just to be sure and to eliminate all possible causes.

I like the black box and the calibration of the LED light output very much. Such careful measurement methods are needed to be sure about the "true happenings" in a circuit.

Measuring batteries over days and weeks is probably not very useful. The chemistry of batteries is very hard to track accurately. I am sure that nobody suspects that the "miracle" is in the batteries, therefore one should use caps, may be 1 F or 10 F super caps (one for input and one for output) to bring down the measurement cycle to a few minutes. Once one has a pretty good idea with the caps one could return to batteries and a test cycle of days or weeks.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 29, 2016, 07:15:02 PM
Inspired by Itsu's use of a solar cell for photometric readings, i've setup a similar cell in a sealed tube with the multi-LED head i'm using at tbe moment

Current draw by the circuit is 60mA, so you were right, Itsu, using a more heavy-duty load certainly moves the readings into a more accessible zone  - fortunately, it also reduces tbe run time, which in my case should be around 12+ hours for me, using 750mAh NiMHs

I can see by a glitch on the supply line trace, causing a similar glitch on the intensity trace, that there will likely be a closer correspondence between supply voltage and sensor o/p than i anticipated, compared to my results posted above, using a photodiode

I've had to apply some filtering to the sensor because the light pulse peaks were overloading my datalogging system, and i think that the filtering is an order of magnitude more than i used with the photodiode, so this will produce a certain difference in behaviour

However, since this test is only to determine the intensity profile of the LED drive within its own setup, from full input charge to end of run discharge, nothing needs to be quantified to refer to any other test results

More later
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 29, 2016, 09:20:52 PM
Here's an example of the sort of application i anticipated for this approach:  at the centre is the basic flyback converter; arranged around the periphery are a variety of inputs, outputs and funky bits (no, i've no idea what that means, either!)

The general idea is to provide a compact 'workhorse' which can accept energy input via a variety of methods (storage, active, and renewable) and which can then convert or transfer that energy into light or a different storage type, respectively

The simple controls allow selection of function (charge/light) and power-level

The 'funky bits' are related to efficiency

I've called this device the 'flyback flash-lite' for reasons which escape me

More later
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 29, 2016, 09:47:20 PM
Conrad and NP,

thanks for your suggestions, but i have sorted it out, as expected it was a measurment error, my error.
It has to do with calibrating/degausing the current probe which was done the wrong way causing all current measurments to be around zero (kind of when you use AC coupling on your scope).
I never used this wrong calibration way, and i don't know why i did it here, probably my head was more at the PC problems.

Now the data makes sense (allthough somewhat dissappointing), see screenshots.

1st is the supplying battery/supercaps, it shows it delivers 103mW
2th is the receiving battery/supercaps, it shows it receives 29mW (thus charging the battery/supercaps)
3th is the led under test in the blackbox, it shows it consumes 32mW (backed up by the solarcell which shows 1126mV = 36mW)
(current controller was set in all 3 screenshots to 10mA/Div., so similar as Ch4 shows)

We are missing 103-(29+32)= 42mW, which probably can be accounted for in the 100K resistor, bc547 transistor, 2x bat42 diodes and transformer.

I did notice in this high power setup that lowering the 100K pot, there will be a point where the pot starts to smell and gets really hot.
Lowering the ohmage decreases the oscillator frequency and increases the leds output (higher pulse duty cycle)

Anyway, i am glad thats out of the way.



Nice going NP, i like that: 'flyback flash-lite'.

I was also playing with the idea to throw in some small solar cells, so this flashlight would probably never run low when used/stored outside (car/camper).

Need to run over your new circuit while doing some rundown tests on my high power setup, i do see L1 still is in, its still needed?


Thanks all,  regards Itsu


Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 29, 2016, 11:49:16 PM
Hi Itsu

Glad to hear that you sorted the power measurement - and that you didn't have to carve up your suoercap board to find it!

The circuit in these initial tests is based on a conventional boost converter type arrangement - the switching device draws some current through the primary inductance to ground, then when it switches off, the stored charge in the inductance is released through the LED into the output storage.  The majority of the remaining energy will be returning via Q1 emitter to deplete the input supply

The intention of the whole setup us to re-use that part of the energy which has been diverted into the outout storage to    extend the runtime - hence the swapping of the output & input stores - a proportion of the input energy can be used again  - its already lit the LED once, then it can be used to light it again - and then maybe a third time - as in the 2nd graph i posted above (see my energy estimations there)

So - don't be disappointed!   We are making progress!

...probably a good idea though not to adjust VR1 too low in resistance - the increased base current of Q1 could overheat the resistance track inside the Varpot - they're only intended to dissipate low mW of power!

My 2nd circuit variation uses a different arrangement - no output swapping

Yes, the inductor L1 is necessary - the sink for the LED flyback energy is back at the input and the inductance assists this action.  On my test circuit C2 is not populated at the moment

Sounds like a good application for this device - travelling off-grid, etc

Hope the high current tests go well - don't forget to factor the storage swap runtime energies into your totals

All the best
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 30, 2016, 09:36:53 AM
Hi Itsu

Here's an example of the comparative stability of illumination, taken from my current photometric test run using a solar cell and a 24 LED head with nominal drive level around 50mA (+/- 10mA say) from 3x 750mAh NiMHs

Over a 6 hour period in the centre of the runtime, the supply volts decreased from 3.9V to 3.77V, a 3.3% drop

During the same period the illumination intensity reading decreased from 3.64V to 3.55V, a 2.4% drop

The NiMH cells spend the largest proportion of their time in this 'flattened' section of their discharge profile, between approx 1.4 - 1.2V, with 1.3V indicating approx 50% charge.  This region can be considered reasonably linear (for all practical puposes)

This all goes to show that the flashlight illumination from this circuit will be perceived to be reasonably constant, for the duration of its effective working voltage range

I've been investigating LED drive circuit technology as a result of this project, and i find that it is quite common to use pulse drive circuits based on boost converter chips, eg. to supply LED backlighting in portable equipment

You can understand that the designers will have 2 important design goals on their list:
 - good efficiency for battery operation;
 - stable illumination levels

Most of these application notes for the different devices show the LEDs driven in grounded mode (as we saw in my comparison tests above), so i believe we were performing a valid comparison with our circuit in this project

If i understand him correctly, Conrad believes that there is no 'free lunch" - ie. we can only extend runtime at the expense of illumination, in which case we would just have to make a tradeoff as to what was most important for us at a certain occasion - a brighter illumjnation for less time - or dimmer illumination for more time

But - if we can achieve more work (because work is not conserved) from the same input energy, then we can extend the runtime by a proportion (losing a little voltage each time, of course, due to losse), and as we've just seen in these preliminary results from my current test, the illumination decreases proportionally less than the voltage

Since our eyes are very non-linear with regard to illumination intensity, we can extend the effective voltage discharge slope and our eyes/brain will interpret the illumination as remaining relatively constant

This is of course *extra* to any effective gains made by pulsing light with an appropriate duty cycle - i am saying that we can use a circuit like this to provide additional work to that other gain, using the same original amount of energy

Tests continue to provide real data in order to make informed decisions, rather than just offer unsupported opinions

Keep up the good work guys
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 31, 2016, 10:15:08 AM
Results are in for comparative 'Illumination vs Runtime' tests between a commercial 24 LED head with straight DC drive, and the same LED head driven by a 'flyback flash-lite' circuit being tested in this project thread

Both setups used the same 3-cell 750mAh NiMH battery, fully-charged to the same initial voltage, with circuit settings adjusted to provide the same initial intensity of illumination

This is to test the suggestion that the flyback flashlight only extends the illumination runtime of the device by decreasing the illumination intensity (ie. actual, not perceived, illumination ) - so this is not merely extension due to duty-cycle

The red traces record the battery terminal voltage, the blue traces record the illumination intensity profile; please note that the 2 graphs have different time scales - the DC run lasts 5 hours, the flyback flashlight run lasts 10 hours


For readers who aren't interested in actual data, i'll include a little story which i heard many years ago, to keep you amused while the rest of us consider the implications of these results...

Quote
A famous fast-bowler, who was a member of the English cricket team, was once invited to join a village cricket match, by his friend whom he was visiting

Let's call this bowler 'Henry' (after the unit of inductance)

The visiting team provided the umpires for the game

Henry, not wishing to take unfair advantage of his skills, bowled modestly and soon realised that he was not only playing against 11 members of the opposing team, but also against the umpire

When one ball, bowled by Henry, hit the batsman's leg-pad and was deflected away from the wicket, Henry's team cried out "Howzat!" to claim the dismissal of the batsman

"Not Out!", replied the umpire

Shortly afterwards, another delivery by Henry was heard to just 'snick' the bat as the ball flew past the batsman, into the wicket-keeper's gloves

"Howzat!" shouted Henry's team

"Not Out!", replied the umpire

By this time, Henry realised that the umpire was not interested in fair play, he was only interested in making sure that his team won

So, with some reluctance (see what i did there?), Henry took his celebrated long run up to the delivery end and sent an express-train of a bowl, rocketing down towards the batsman

The middle stump was knocked clean out of the ground and went flying past the wicket-keeper, who had to dive for cover

Henry turned to the umpire, winked, and said in his gentle Lancashire accent, "We nearly 'ad 'im THAT time, eh?"

...meanwhile, back at the bench...

The data not only disproves the idea that the approach being used in this thread is only making a gain in runtime at the expense of illumination intensity, it also shows that whilst the runtime has been doubled by the circuit, the illumination remains at a more consistently high proportion of the same initial level than the commercial DC drive arrangement, using NiMH cells


"We nearly 'ad 'im that time,eh?"  ...he was a card, old Henry!
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: itsu on January 31, 2016, 02:43:44 PM
Nul-points,

Quote
...meanwhile, back at the bench...

The data not only disproves the idea that the approach being used in this thread is only making a gain in runtime at the expense of illumination intensity, it also shows that whilst the runtime has been doubled by the circuit, the illumination remains at a more consistently high proportion of the same initial level than the commercial DC drive arrangement, using NiMH cells


Those are amazing results indeed, its a win win situation looking at the doubled time and stable / flatter light output.

I will be collecting some parts to be able to build a 'flyback flash-lite' circuit myself as i have a project in mind which is using leds and for which this circuit would be perfect.

Thanks,   Itsu
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 31, 2016, 08:01:25 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ...So - it's true....
 
 
 
 
 
 .....the drugs really *don't* work.....
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on January 31, 2016, 08:02:41 PM

Lol
 
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: citfta on January 31, 2016, 11:24:50 PM
And some people wondered why I started a thread about people that add nothing to the forum.  You are so right NP.  The drugs don't work.  Especially when someone doesn't take them when they should.  I think that problem goes along with the ability to nor really read what is written.  You plainly said in your very first post there was NO OU in this, just a very efficient use of energy.  And all tests so far have proven you are correct.  Thanks again for a neat simple little circuit that does just what it is supposed to do.

Carroll
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 01, 2016, 12:03:59 AM
And some people wondered why I started a thread about people that add nothing to the forum.  You are so right NP.  The drugs don't work.  Especially when someone doesn't take them when they should.  I think that problem goes along with the ability to nor really read what is written.  You plainly said in your very first post there was NO OU in this, just a very efficient use of energy.  And all tests so far have proven you are correct.  Thanks again for a neat simple little circuit that does just what it is supposed to do.

Carroll


Thanks Carroll,  yes, wise words in that post & the thread you started.  Interesting style of moderation on this site  ;-)

Kind regards
np
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: ramset on February 01, 2016, 03:38:53 AM
93
Don't get use to this view...
Your horrible manners have inspired me to do something I have never done here.

Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 01, 2016, 12:33:34 PM
93
Don't get use to this view...
Your horrible manners have inspired me to do something I have never done here.


....Uh Oh....

.......................Chet, you're not going to....   to....

...SING?!?
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: ramset on February 01, 2016, 11:00:43 PM
Hmmm
Well that would be one way to clear a room 😦

I am annoyed that it came to this. ,I had a perfect record (never dropped a dime on anyone)

However,I also had not seen such a nice request from a thread author ...( yourself )

Your one swell fellow !

Chet
PS
Although one can never be too sure about a rapid response from Stefan !!
We shall see ?
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 01, 2016, 11:59:49 PM

Awwww, Chet ...i'm getting all tearful now


PHEW ....are you really not going to sing?  ;-)


i think it was Santana who had a song:  Let the Children Play

but eventually, it gets late and they need to sleep, and let the grown-ups talk

i don't begrudge lil' Mix having a bit of childish fun - you're only young twice, and the bit in the middle can be hellish

but, equally, lil' Mix needs to respect others, too - we all meet up with Mr Karma one day

...and i've just given Mr Karma a 1000 Bitcoins and lil' Mixs IP & MAC addresses  ;-)


thanks for being one of the good guys, Chet
 
(ok, i have the ear defenders on now - take it away, Maestro!)
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: ramset on February 02, 2016, 02:36:39 AM



                                                                                                                                           .
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: tinman on February 02, 2016, 05:19:41 AM
MANNERS ?

I DO POETRY PLAY CLASICAL JAZZ PAINT AND ROCK AND ROLE GTOW FLOWERS TALK TO TREES AND STUDY ALIENS IN DETAIL ....

But when its comes to being fooled or coned lied to or cheated insulted or forced to read a load of nonsense I get weak at the knees red in the face and boil up inside .. But I cant hurt a fly so sometimes I just let it all out !

The thing that truly disturbs me the most is the lack of unity among man you don't see that with woman they just sort things out together but men just eat each other alive.

Stephan needs to follow through with the OU prize and not to hes rules but to ours ! He needs to go and get some funding like say a few million bucks but hes so stuck with the man eating concept of its all mine I am in control and will do what ever I want regardless of what others want ...

He wrote up a load of info about a quantum generator he was convinced was fake and blocked out anyone from responding to hes claims .. The generator was in fact plugged to a grid supply and claimed to be a 10 kw free energy system and Stephan just could not grasp why it had to be plugged into the grid. 

He condemned it to such a degree its was criminal ! Yet the technology does work and take 1kw and converts it to 10kw the plug in bit is no different than a tesla first attempt on free energy ...

Mine is obviously different its light weight cheep and very powerful so much so it can fly !!!

Never attack a man unless he has attacked you .......... And when I get attacked I never forget but do often forgive ! But until man starts to learn what unity is its best he give up on over unity .....

Don't rock my boat and I wont rock your or put a hole in it ......... I came here to share but I have terms of unity first equal ownership second ect ...... lol x

93rd

Perhaps if you actually showed those here one of your easy to build free energy machines, you would get far more respect. But for now, you really are just some one that talks to trees
I would really start to worry if the trees started to talk back.

Brad.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: TinselKoala on February 02, 2016, 10:35:38 AM
You're a challenge or two behind, there, 93rdAtom. When will you be demonstrating any of your claimed miracle devices, as you have been challenged to do?

I know when... and so do you: NEVER !!
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: AlienGrey on February 02, 2016, 12:16:35 PM
TinselKoala

You know the rules son ! Play it by the book ! ACCA is to have the first king monkey 100 kw free energy transformer he will do what you require and confirm ...

There is to be no public presentation of the technology until its ready for mass production ! I all ready have an order for 20 000 of them to be built ASAP ......... I am finding it very difficult how that is going to happen ? So unless your willing to put your paddle into the water with out a splash you will just have to wait until you speak to ACCA .

Also as re the MUF one has to make sure that these technologies hold to a very high level of ethics and I personally don't want them to be miss used in any way ! Your a cleaver man try and chew on the way forward that maximises the long term prospects of its delivery !

This should include a way that prevents other MUFs say in china to entre the global market with it ! At this point we don't need any parts from china thankfully and no magnets ! Its safe with no FR static or high frequency or voltage and costs for the base unit are only $200 and there after its just a simple set of special transformers ...

I don't see a need for a large cap bank or any fancy tech .... But I was thinking of a USA and UK patent application to hold down the over all potential and was hoping you will consider all the facts ! If you wish to build one than there has to be a logical and sensible step forward that can centralise a development fund ASAP .. That will require some NDA and equal ownership contracts sorry but that is part of the road we will be traveling on..

I fill strongly that we can hold our ground of product price and beat any problems from china or India and one may also consider that a lot of people just want very cheap grid power with no generators at there location ect this is the majority of consumers out there ! So a global energy bond deal will be available to them if we can find locations to pump it in there national and local grids ?

The advantage of 100 free energy kw that is cheep safe light weight and small is obvious and there would be a lot to consider as to licence agreements to other MUFs ect ......

Its best to consider a starting point strategy that will maximise all the above ! The main aim is not just how one goes about the deployment but also a global HQ for all of us here and others we may chose to unite together as a high tech R and D group and not just in energy but also in  many other cutting edge technologies and science including the arts ....

I am soon to start rehearsals with a new orchestra called the galactic rainbow orchestra and a support group called the mega watts ! I tend to like a bit of up beat excitement around me ! The galactic rainbow orchestra will require a real zero gravity flying saucer not a pretend one ........

So smile son the future is very bright if you are ready to cut your self free from your usual technical data ball and chain and just get on with the show ........ Just except a way of unity among us legal joint ownership and an equal vote as to what we will deliver and how ect that's all that is needed ..

We must find a starting point of total and absolute strength to pull this off so as not to lose it or we will all become just a bunch of idiots with custard pies all over us and a complete laughing stock if we let china and India and Russia pinch it ....

So let me see some logic from you please talk to ACCA and be good friends from here on .......... No back stabbing of negatives just honestly love and respect and no time wasting ... Get to it son ! I wont let you down ! lolx

Well 93.5 Atom  thats just wonderfull i'm so happy for you, by the way have you watched the first episode of the new X-files video ? ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1SmJUBT5q0
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: AlienGrey on February 02, 2016, 03:35:31 PM
Mr gray !

I live in fear every time I cross the road but when I reach the other side I begin to fill safe again ! Governments are a community to them self's they have there own world order and to be honest they are just a bunch of people like you and me. I have no interest in them or there world order ... This is my planet every inch belongs to me and I am ok with sharing it with you and anyone else who will respect it and look after it and its people..

We live we die that's the deal ! Its what happens in the middle bit that I am interested in , When logic is let out of the gate its like a river that can never be stopped and when its banks are so dry of the need for water every drop that flows is taken up and the river never reaches the ocean ...

It will take 100 years to challenge the current energy system and that is if we go full on tap today ! Its impossible to make a dent in the existing technology over night and the governments know that and remember I already have government support and funding.

There is no fear or government problems the law is on all our sides and if they brake there own law my pet TREX will eat them alive and he is very hungry ............. ! I will need to feed him something very soon in fact I have claims against goggle and Microsoft and 12 of the worlds leading energy supply companies and pharmaceuticals with some claims against every government on the planet ....

So my TREX will have a lot to eat ! hahah !

Also I rock like a mounting fly like a bird and sting like a bee and men in black coats are most welcome to come round for tea and a bite to eat and than I will feed them to my TEREX if they miss behave ...

You see the battle ground is not free energy its corruption greed evil and stupidity ! I live only to die so I will die fighting all the way to heaven .... Unlike you who probably runs when he see a rabbit or a fox !

The earth our mother and the space time continuum our father have made me the way I am and to that I am most respectful and great full and to pay them with my love and respect I have decided to become the biggest pain in the back side any government ever had and I do mean every government but my own whom I respect with all my hart ....My government are not as bad as all the rest and mostly play by the rules of cricket ! Mostly ... hahaha

So let the show begin sir ................................what will you do when its your turn to love this world ? Nothing ? Learn to walk on water and if you sink its only because you weigh to much so try and lighten up your load of fear and self torture smile a bit and than think !

lol x


It's not that I fear, fear but i don't want to follow the rabbit down the  rabbit hole, as i have responsibility to another and a number of rescued animals who also rely on me. and occasionally have the odd fox and cub basking in the warmth of the sun light on my property, I my self wasn’t born all that long before I had more than a near death experience, and consider I’m here for a reason, I don't do the lottery because I’m not really interested in wealth and greed, a native American one said to me  quote 'enjoy your trek trough live but leave no tracks'. I’m quite happy to reveal my name and E-mail address and sign your N D A but disclosing my material assets and disclosing my personal information at this stage no way Jose! Obviously I have a scope and some other test equipment so if your comfortable with that then let me know and I will be happy to help you all I can.

AG
Title: Breaking News: Bessler's Wheel found in Nevada
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:41:53 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:49:55 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:51:23 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:52:18 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:53:46 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:57:35 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 05:58:38 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:00:38 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:01:31 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:03:19 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:04:05 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:05:33 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:07:21 PM
.
Title: Breaking News: Bessler's Wheel found in Nevada
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:09:30 PM
.
Title: Breaking News: Bessler's Wheel found in Nevada
Post by: nul-points on February 02, 2016, 06:10:02 PM
.
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: ramset on February 03, 2016, 02:00:27 PM
Doc
You want some help fixing this Mess? [see if Stefan can Remove selective post numbers from the whole thread to neaten it up ?? [maybe post numbers in a pm [to him]]


a very nice project and there are many simple and good experiments which can come off of this type of test methodology  .

your contribution here is wonderful !!



Chet
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on February 03, 2016, 05:30:34 PM
Doc
You want some help fixing this Mess?
...
a very nice project and there are many simple and good experiments which can come off of this type of test methodology  .
...
Chet

I appreciate the offer Chet, but everything is good, thanks
np
 
Title: Re: "...that's not a knife - THIS is a knife!!!" ...er, OU flashlight
Post by: nul-points on December 03, 2018, 11:03:01 AM
Update to this (troll-trashed) Flyback Flashlite thread at:-


      https://overunity.com/16384/flyback-data/msg527642/#msg527642


circuit and measurements showing OU achieved by feedback, storage and re-use of energy