Author Topic: Joule Thief (Read 6343183 times)

TinselKoala · « **Reply #16815 on:** January 25, 2015, 10:17:10 AM »

An absolute _must watch_ video from Dave at EEVblog:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoqF3gjLIyI

MarkE · « **Reply #16816 on:** January 25, 2015, 11:28:00 AM »

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 25, 2015, 10:17:10 AM

An absolute _must watch_ video from Dave at EEVblog:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoqF3gjLIyI

It was an entertaining rant. I hope his point about the need for reliable measurements gets through to at least some people.

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #16817 on:** January 25, 2015, 05:30:13 PM »

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 25, 2015, 10:17:10 AM

An absolute _must watch_ video from Dave at EEVblog:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoqF3gjLIyI

I have subscribed to this guy for years and he is excellent. Man, I would hate to be that poor bastard making those stupid claims on his blog, ha ha. We obviously have many circuits here that are far more efficient than that guy's, and we know that they are not "bending the laws of physics".

I hope MileHigh sees this video, he will love it.

Of course, I suppose there will be some that claim that Dave is a paid shill for big oil or something.

Thanks for posting this TK, I have so many subscriptions over at Youtube, it might have been quite a while before I saw this.

Bill

TinselKoala · « **Reply #16818 on:** January 25, 2015, 06:53:01 PM »

While the ranting was very entertaining, the important part of the video in my opinion is the _process_ : Dave redrew the schematic according to an easy-to-understand layout convention, he analyzed the circuit using standard engineering principles and knowledge (referring to data sheets and other solid information), he predicted the waveforms and other readings, and then he went on to test his predictions and demonstrate that his predictions were correct by actual measurements.

MarkE · « **Reply #16819 on:** January 25, 2015, 07:38:59 PM »

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 25, 2015, 06:53:01 PM

While the ranting was very entertaining, the important part of the video in my opinion is the _process_ : Dave redrew the schematic according to an easy-to-understand layout convention, he analyzed the circuit using standard engineering principles and knowledge (referring to data sheets and other solid information), he predicted the waveforms and other readings, and then he went on to test his predictions and demonstrate that his predictions were correct by actual measurements.

I thought that it was instructive that he wrote down the bullet item claims and then showed how almost all of them were flat false.

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #16820 on:** January 25, 2015, 09:35:26 PM »

So, does this mean that Joule Thief circuits are NOT overunity?

Damn!

But seriously, I did leave a comment to Dave on how I achieve "free light" using similar circuits, (using "dead" batteries saved from the trash heap) but that obviously it is not O.U.

Bill

MarkE · « **Reply #16821 on:** January 25, 2015, 10:18:41 PM »

Quote from: Pirate88179 on January 25, 2015, 09:35:26 PM

So, does this mean that Joule Thief circuits are NOT overunity?

Damn!

But seriously, I did leave a comment to Dave on how I achieve "free light" using similar circuits, (using "dead" batteries saved from the trash heap) but that obviously it is not O.U.

Bill

To me increased efficiency is as free as things get. So if you get x number of lumen hours from a AA battery with one circuit, and x plus y hours with another, then the "free" y lumen hours are what count. My colleague has developed some insanely high efficiency LED circuits that work with a single AA Alkaline cell but they are commercial developments so I cannot share them. But he has shown me ~500 lumen hours from an LED driver circuit using one AA alkaline cell.

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #16822 on:** January 25, 2015, 10:34:46 PM »

Quote from: MarkE on January 25, 2015, 10:18:41 PM

To me increased efficiency is as free as things get. So if you get x number of lumen hours from a AA battery with one circuit, and x plus y hours with another, then the "free" y lumen hours are what count. My colleague has developed some insanely high efficiency LED circuits that work with a single AA Alkaline cell but they are commercial developments so I cannot share them. But he has shown me ~500 lumen hours from an LED driver circuit using one AA alkaline cell.

That sounds exactly what I was attempting to try. But, seeing how cheap electronics are from China, packaging and other expenses, I did not see how I could do this.

I wish him good luck as the main reason I was trying to do this was...even though we all have seen what the JT circuit can do...no one I know of has ever marketed a device that can run on a "dead" battery. I have modified flashlights to run on a single AA bat. that were brighter than the original using 3 AAs. It would also last longer. But, bringing something like this to market when you can buy an led flashlight for $2.00 including batteries is hard to compete with.

I have not given up, I am just not as excited about doing this as I once was. Of course, I could get China manufactures to produce whatever I want but, this would take an order of at least several thousand units. (Understandably)

Mark, please keep us posted on your friend's progress, or at least, let us know when his product is available. This would be a great step forward getting this type of thing in the commercial market.

Bill

synchro1 · « **Reply #16823 on:** January 26, 2015, 12:20:03 AM »

Quote from MarkE,

"To me increased efficiency is as free as things get. So if you get x number of lumen hours from a AA battery with one circuit, and x plus y hours with another, then the "free" y lumen hours are what count. My colleague has developed some insanely high efficiency LED circuits that work with a single AA Alkaline cell but they are commercial developments so I cannot share them. But he has shown me ~500 lumen hours from an LED driver circuit using one AA alkaline cell".

The relationship of pulse frequency to LED brightness is the same as voltage. Increasing DC pulse frequency can increase LED brightness the same as increasing voltage. This frequency to luminosity proportion is outside Ohm's law P=V.A. The problem is that increasing LED brightness with higher pulse frequency shortens bulb life. The 500 lumens MarkE is bragging about from his "Secret Source" is probably just burning the bulb out. MarkE posted over 4000 comments in the space of one calender year. He's burning a hole through the forum the same way!

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #16824 on:** January 26, 2015, 12:31:10 AM »

Quote from: synchro1 on January 26, 2015, 12:20:03 AM

Quote from MarkE,

"To me increased efficiency is as free as things get. So if you get x number of lumen hours from a AA battery with one circuit, and x plus y hours with another, then the "free" y lumen hours are what count. My colleague has developed some insanely high efficiency LED circuits that work with a single AA Alkaline cell but they are commercial developments so I cannot share them. But he has shown me ~500 lumen hours from an LED driver circuit using one AA alkaline cell".

The relationship of pulse frequency to LED brightness is the same as voltage. Increasing DC pulse frequency can increase LED brightness the same as increasing voltage. This frequency to luminosity proportion is outside Ohm's law P=V.A. The problem is that increasing LED brightness with higher pulse frequency shortens bulb life. The 500 lumens MarkE is bragging about from his "Secret Source" is probably just burning the bulb out. MarkE posted over 4000 comments in the space of one calender year. He's burning a hole through the forum the same way!

I doubt that you are correct. I have many high voltage/high frequency JT's here running in my home now for over 5 years and....guess what? No led burnout.

I am even using some commercial bulbs in my lights, like the Lights of America 24 chip led bulbs and ...they are just fine with 400 volts at high freq. My bedside table uses 2 of those bulbs and...I have been using it every night for many years and...the bulbs still work. (still using the original D cell battery also)

Do you have any real evidence to support what you have claimed?

If so, please post it.

Thanks,

Bill

MarkE · « **Reply #16825 on:** January 26, 2015, 01:11:42 AM »

Quote from: synchro1 on January 26, 2015, 12:20:03 AM

Quote from MarkE,

"To me increased efficiency is as free as things get. So if you get x number of lumen hours from a AA battery with one circuit, and x plus y hours with another, then the "free" y lumen hours are what count. My colleague has developed some insanely high efficiency LED circuits that work with a single AA Alkaline cell but they are commercial developments so I cannot share them. But he has shown me ~500 lumen hours from an LED driver circuit using one AA alkaline cell".

The relationship of pulse frequency to LED brightness is the same as voltage. Increasing DC pulse frequency can increase LED brightness the same as increasing voltage. This frequency to luminosity proportion is outside Ohm's law P=V.A. The problem is that increasing LED brightness with higher pulse frequency shortens bulb life. The 500 lumens MarkE is bragging about from his "Secret Source" is probably just burning the bulb out. MarkE posted over 4000 comments in the space of one calender year. He's burning a hole through the forum the same way!

No, LED brightness is a nearly linear function of LED current multiplied by duty cycle. LED brightness has a very non-linear relationship to LED drive voltage. He is getting ~500 lumen hours from a single alkaline AA cell. I did not state the brightness. I did not say he was getting 500 lumens from one LED, although that is feasible for a single modern 3W LED that would require a heat sink and it is not what he is doing. He is running his LED well within its safe limits.

MarkE · « **Reply #16826 on:** January 26, 2015, 01:15:59 AM »

Quote from: Pirate88179 on January 26, 2015, 12:31:10 AM

I doubt that you are correct. I have many high voltage/high frequency JT's here running in my home now for over 5 years and....guess what? No led burnout.

I am even using some commercial bulbs in my lights, like the Lights of America 24 chip led bulbs and ...they are just fine with 400 volts at high freq. My bedside table uses 2 of those bulbs and...I have been using it every night for many years and...the bulbs still work. (still using the original D cell battery also)

Do you have any real evidence to support what you have claimed?

If so, please post it.

Thanks,

Bill

No he does not.

synchro1 · « **Reply #16827 on:** January 26, 2015, 02:12:20 AM »

Output (lumen) per Watt is even worse than lumen per mA. As mA increase Vf also increases so the Vf x I product increases at a faster rate per lumen than just I does. So, again, maximum lumen/Watt is achieved at low mA compared to rated mA and lumen/Watt efficiency improves with decreasing current.

synchro1 · « **Reply #16828 on:** January 26, 2015, 02:56:13 AM »

There's two ways to cause problems increasing lumens in LEDS, both involve running too much current through them: Firstly; By raising the voltage which raises current draw, and Secondly; Raising the frequency with the same result. Running too much current through the LED wastes power and shortens the bulb's lifespan. Most of the apparent savings from increasing frequency and cutting duty cycle come from miscalculations. There's no way to beat the peak efficiency watts per Lumen ratio that the bulbs are rated for. The bottom line is, you're better off increasing luminosity by adding extra bulbs to the array and lowering the current input. I demonstrated that in my multiple LED video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP39OoaSQb0

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #16829 on:** January 26, 2015, 03:26:25 AM »

Quote from: synchro1 on January 26, 2015, 02:56:13 AM

There's two ways to cause problems increasing lumens in LEDS, both involve running too much current through them: Firstly; By raising the voltage which raises current draw, and Secondly; Raising the frequency with the same result. Running too much current through the LED wastes power and shortens the bulb's lifespan. Most of the apparent savings from increasing frequency and cutting duty cycle come from miscalculations. There's no way to beat the peak efficiency watts per Lumen ratio that the bulbs are rated for. The bottom line is, you're better off increasing luminosity by adding extra bulbs to the array and lowering the current input. I demonstrated that in my multiple LED video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP39OoaSQb0

But, I use very little current. Only high voltage at a high freq. This is why my lights last so many hours on "dead" AA batteries.

Now, I know this is a little bit of a parlor trick in that the leds are flashing on/off at about 30,000 times/sec. So, if the duty cycle is close to 50%, then they are off as much as they are on. But, our lights in our homes flash on/off at 60 times/sec and no one notices this so, I do not think of this as a real trick.

As far as calculations go...I suck at math and I only observe what my lights can do.....I do very little predicting. If/when any of my leds actually burn out, I will let you know. I did fry my share of leds back in my early days, the smell was terrible. But, that was long before I discovered (not invented by me) these high voltage/high freq. circuits.

Bill

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Joule Thief (Read 6343183 times)

TinselKoala

Re: Joule Thief

MarkE

Re: Joule Thief

Pirate88179

Re: Joule Thief

TinselKoala

Re: Joule Thief

MarkE

Re: Joule Thief

Pirate88179

Re: Joule Thief

MarkE

Re: Joule Thief

Pirate88179

Re: Joule Thief

synchro1

Re: Joule Thief

Pirate88179

Re: Joule Thief

MarkE

Re: Joule Thief

MarkE

Re: Joule Thief

synchro1

Re: Joule Thief

synchro1

Re: Joule Thief

Pirate88179

Re: Joule Thief