Brad:

It is not a death spike at all.
It is in fact present in all JT circuit's--it's just that no one has taken any notice of it as of yet.
I have now tested 3 different JT circuit's,and it is present in all of them.
This !so called! death spike actually helps in raise the brightness of the LED.

More wilful ignorance and wilful stupidity on display for all to see.  The Joule Thief circuits that you have built and tested are all not working properly.  You have too many turns on the L2 feedback coil and that's causing a breakdown in the transistor junction.  The moral of the story is that if you don't build a "canned version" of a Joule Thief just like beginners are told to build their first SSG without any modifications, then you have to know what you are doing and test it yourself to ensure that it is operating properly.

But since "Brad can't be wrong" you are following through with your insane line of reasoning.  It's a farce.

The death spike does NOT help in the brightness of the LED - it kills some of the energy stored in the magnetic core - and you were told precisely why that is the case.  You must be daft.

You may do what you please MH,but as you only made this !death spike! discovery (that you didnt know existed until i showed some test results),it is clear that you do not really know all that is going on within the circuit.

Big Brother wants you.

Im not going down this babying road with you MH. If you cannot work out where the current flow continues from where the marked dot's are,then you clearly do not belong here.

More "Brad can't be wrong" insanity.  Follow the "red dot" current flow and find yourself at a dead end for lazy babies that are too daft to think through their own statements to completion.  Go for it and show us all where the red dots lead.  Are you the one that belongs here after six years and doing something as foolish and stupid as your "red dot current to nowhere - fill in the blanks yourself" nonsense?

MileHigh

I will now be continuing my work and experiments on the thread below--where the garbage can be filtered out.
No point in arguing any more with some one that dose not even have a JT to experiment with,nor has any plans to do so--but still remains a self acclaimed ex-spurt in the subject.

I will also be putting the cool joule circuit back together,and having another look at that,and the effects of miller capacitance,where the circuit !can! operate using this effect.This will be done in the thread linked below.
 
http://overunity.com/16486/resonance-circuits-and-resonance-systems/new/#new


Brad

   Well MileHigh,you have had a good dose of the Tinman!
             John.

Indeed I have!  lol  You know how in many cities they have their annual "Zombie Walk?"

"The Night of the Living Joule Thief Zombies" - featuring the infallible Dr. Brainfry.  Coming to a theater near you.  Just remember it's all fantasy.

I will close the loop on the wine glass later and then stay tuned for "The Birth of the Resonant Joule Thief" - featuring the prophet Resotrance Man.  In spectacular 4D.

MileHigh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf0wxx6Eec0

@MH

Just leave it alone. Let me just say that all you have explained thus far I could counter and this thread could again go on by you answering a series of questions on function and soon you will realize that the "current flow (CF)" construct is BS. It just looks like CF from your present vantage point and from the limited way our scopes can portray the effect, but man oh man, you guys are just off the mark on real logic function but I have to say, perfectly fluent in the standard model of unproven effect.

@all

That's exactly why everyone is still in the race but only stuck at the starting line, all the toes right on the edge ready to sprint, but no one can hear the starter pistol because the standard EE just loves making so much noise and so much wrangling. hahaha 

This little JT circuit is the perfect device, small, simple and easy to manipulate to learn tons more then anything so far but guys just get side tracked (had other posts but never got the chance) with so much undue commotion that for me just makes it impossible to post anything additional.

@tinman

OK, now that the storm has passed, maybe try this. I will not go into any great details.

Notice I added a coil (1) and a switch (2) to the diagram just to give some of you a new way of testing this thingy. Now the coil (1) could be an air core but will require more wire, it could be a rod core coil with less wire or it could even be a small toroid transformer with descent primary wire and as much secondary wire as you want that can light another LED or return the juice back to the battery sides. I will not say any more for now.

Maybe one last thing. @tinman I know you always use your scope with the ground reference but it may be a good idea for you that when you do that, also do it with only the probe lead on each side to see the differences in waveforms. Taking differential readings is not always the way to go. This can also create other potential loops that you do not know to what degree it is affecting the function of these very small devices.

Let's say you scope each side of a coil with your probe lead. We know that at each point if taken with only the probe, let's say you see this elaborate waveform and they are identical on each side of the coil. What does that tell you? Now with the ground and probe on that same coil, what will you see? If both sides are identical then you should see a flat line because the "differential" between these two points will be zero since they are identical even though they are actual real waveforms. But usually when we see a flat line, we think there is no activity, or you see another waveform which is the "remainder" waveform once both have been cancelled out. But don't you really want to know what is happening only at the start or end of the coil. I mean that's the main impetus to all this which is the change it undergoes from one end to the other.

Pointal scoping will tell you exactly what is going on in the coil and differential scoping will then tell you what it amounts to. But without the pointal telling you this side is hitting 500 volts while the other side is hitting 200 volts for you to then get your differential waveform. You need to know everything, not just one factor. But you guys only use the later, always satisfied with half the story. Puzzling indeed. The actual values shown of the pointal probing is NOT IMPORTANT. It is how the waveform is produced, up, down, squiggly, ragged, sloping all of these tell you what is going on inside the coil to produce those waveforms. They do not happen by accident.

wattsup

I am no zombie I can assure you because I don't sleepwalk when there is an issue that needs attention like you do.

Wattsup, the truth is that you live in your own unique electronics dream world, and I would be surprised if anything truly interesting comes of it.  No need to play the bouncer either, Brad is no angel as was clearly evidenced in this thread.  He decided to run away to pursue electronics on his own terms.  So it's back to both of you practicing your own extra unique special custom versions of electronics.

MileHigh

You are losing energy every time the Joule Thief has a death spike.  If you have another identical core, you could build the same Joule Thief but this time pay attention to the number of turns in L1 and L2, and make sure the transistor switches fully on without wasting excess base current.  That Joule Thief would blow your existing crippled Joule Thief out of the water.  But I seriously doubt that you have the courage to challenge yourself and make abetter circuit and prove that your original circuit was no good.  Two opposing stimuli and something might snap.

MH
Some of what you say is true--if we build your standard JT,where it has a fixed base resistor value.
But with a higher turn ratio on L2 to that of L1,and a variable base resistance,then the (your) JT circuit is just as efficient,as i have already done what you say above.

The whole point was to be able to maintain maximum light output,as the battery voltage drop's,and the !death spike! version dose that very well. The other advantage is that by lowering the base resistance,the circuit will run normally at a much lower voltage that your standard fixed resistor circuit. In fact,your standard JT circuit is quite inefficient in it self,and the second version where the LED is across the L1 coil only,is far more efficient,as it excludes the battery in the current loop during the off time of the transistor.

The second circuit below will drain more of the remaining energy from the battery--can you work out why?. Can you see how in the original circuit(your fav circuit)that the battery is being drained even during the Off time of the transistor,while the second circuit only draws power from the battery during the on time.

Brad

Its funny. How many times have we talked about this. I had seen it before I built it. It is kinda easy to see that the battery is in series with the led when across the transistor, and the direction of that current through the led is depleting the battery during transistor off time.

Did TK ever show his findings of the difference of input with the led across the coil then the transistor? Remember the right way and the wrong way?

Im just not sure why they cant see it.

Hey Brad. Can you repost the circuit with the led on the base side coil. 

Mags

Ah yes.
The first one below is the circuit i posted some time back. It is just the SS/SSG circuit,without the death spike driving the LED.
The second is the new beaut DSJT (deathspike joule thief)circuit--works a treat
But the third(new circuit) is the king of JTs. We call this one the Triple DSJT 
In the Triple DSJT,all most all the energy is used driving LED's. The two LEDs across the VR clamp the voltage across the VR,so as the VR may only have a voltage drop across it that is equal to the clamping voltage of the LED's. As the battery voltage drop's,the base resistance can be decreased. This will insure that the LED on L1 remains lit as bright as can be at low battery voltages. It also removes the wasted energy dissipated by the VR,and uses most of that energy to drive the other two LED's.


Brad


Brad

Brad:

In fact,your standard JT circuit is quite inefficient in it self,and the second version where the LED is across the L1 coil only,is far more efficient,as it excludes the battery in the current loop during the off time of the transistor.

The second circuit below will drain more of the remaining energy from the battery--can you work out why?. Can you see how in the original circuit(your fav circuit)that the battery is being drained even during the Off time of the transistor,while the second circuit only draws power from the battery during the on time.

No, you are wrong.  The standard Joule Thief circuit is more efficient than the second circuit.  Also, the standard Joule Thief circuit will do a better job at draining the battery compared to the second circuit.  It's not a huge difference in both cases but that's not the point.  So you and Magluvin are foiled again because you did not think it through.  So now the two of you now have an opportunity to think it through and find the error in your ways.

MileHigh