Author Topic: Joule Thief 101 (Read 944364 times)

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1725 on:** April 11, 2016, 10:50:01 AM »

Quote from: picowatt on April 11, 2016, 10:47:37 AM

And does this tirade indicate that Faraday's law does indeed state that the induced voltage will be at a minimum when the rate of change of the magnetic flux is also at a minimum?

Do you know how small and insignificant a picowatt is? Apparently it is very hard to get it right... or something like that!

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1726 on:** April 11, 2016, 10:52:06 AM »

Wow youre really upset PW, Why?

Dont be sad, maybe you can learn something from the information I provided to you? Maybe 6 or 12 months some of it might make some sense to you... If not then TK can learn and let you in on the secrets...

Hahaha so very funny!!!

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

picowatt · « **Reply #1727 on:** April 11, 2016, 10:56:46 AM »

Quote from: EMJunkie on April 11, 2016, 10:50:01 AM

Do you know how small and insignificant a picowatt is? Apparently it is very hard to get it right... or something like that!

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

Yes I do, and I routinely measure at levels well below that most every day.

Apparently you have real issues with admitting being wrong.

Is the correct answer to Tinman's original question 90 or 180 degrees?

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1728 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:13:50 AM »

Quote from: picowatt on April 11, 2016, 10:56:46 AM

Yes I do, and I routinely measure at levels well below that most every day.

Apparently you have real issues with admitting being wrong.

Is the correct answer to Tinman's original question 90 or 180 degrees?

I would re-post my response, but I know you cant read it!

Now your Battleship has been sunk and youre clambering for your life boat, which looks sad for you old mate, will you be learning to read now? If so, let me know and I can re-post then!

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

picowatt · « **Reply #1729 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:20:29 AM »

Quote from: EMJunkie on April 11, 2016, 11:13:50 AM

I would re-post my response, but I know you cant read it!

Now your Battleship has been sunk and youre clambering for your life boat, which looks sad for you old mate, will you be learning to read now? If so, let me know and I can re-post then!

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

Goodness, your response need only be 180 degrees as per your original answer or 90 degrees based on the references you cite.

Perhaps you believe it to be something else altogether...

tinman · « **Reply #1730 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:33:59 AM »

author=MileHigh link=topic=8341.msg480140#msg480140 date=1460299029]

MileHigh

Quote

Some advice:

Your advice is not needed,as most of the time it is incorrect--as in this case !again!

Quote

If you are going to post a diagram, and least try to have what you see in the diagram make sense. In your diagram the output waveform shown does not match the physical setup shown,

Once again-either you did not read description in post as to what the diagram is showing,and/or cannot read the description on diagram it self.
The diagram clearly state's,and shows- EMF will equal 0 when magnetic flux through L1 is at maximum. The diagram clearly shows that the magnet is at the closest point to the coils core,and there for the magnetic flux through the core will be at it's maximum. At that point,the wave form clearly shows the 0 volt point of that wave form at the output of the coil-the only reason the wave form was included.

Quote

it's a mistake

Most of what you have said on this thread is a mistake,so i am not really to concerned when you make another-as above.

Quote

Indeed I am being somewhat picky here

I would say more a need to continually harass me,as you did not like me proving you wrong on so many occasion's.

Quote

The problem is that often enough you are dealing with people that don't understand what is going on and therefore they can easily be misled and confused by confusing graphic images that have errors in them.

There are no errors on the diagram--just your need to try and scale your way back out of the hole you dug your self.

Is there anyone else that had trouble relating my diagram below in conjunction with this post to EMJ ?.
That is also correct. And if we use a PM generator,the EMF produced from the stator coil will be 0 when the PM is directly at the center of the stator coil's core

Brad

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1731 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:34:59 AM »

Quote from: picowatt on April 11, 2016, 11:20:29 AM

Goodness, your response need only be 180 degrees as per your original answer or 90 degrees based on the references you cite.

Perhaps you believe it to be something else altogether...

You still Dont Get it, you truely dont get it...

Of course Brads Circuit as was shown will be ±90 Degrees. The issue here is as I have stated some 20,000 times now but youre incapable of reading it... is that the Prediction that TK reffered to is incorrect, it still is and you, you idiot are supporting that!!!

Faraday's Law of Electromagnetic Induction, with Heinrich Lenz's Contribution,

PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX
PREDICTS E.M.F - NOT CURRENT AND NOT THE MAGNETIC FLUX

CAN YOU READ THAT ?

You just dont get it!!! Youre brain is still in bed!

PW, seriously now, youre wrong, youre never going to admit it, never going to concede and will continue to play Dumb Dumb and run off on wild random Claim Chases of your wildest fantasys.

I hope I have done a good job of making it clear for you to be able to start your learn to read classes... Start with Sight Words... Its how they do it these days.

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

Still:

picowatt · « **Reply #1732 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:43:11 AM »

Quote from: EMJunkie on April 11, 2016, 11:34:59 AM

Of course Brads Circuit as was shown will be ±90 Degrees.

See, admitting being wrong was not that hard after all. I am proud of you...

Now, using Faraday's law which states that the induced voltage is directly proportional to the rate of change of the magnetic flux, would it not be logical to predict that when the rate of change of the magnetic flux is at a minimum, the induced voltage will also be at a minimum?

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1733 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:47:02 AM »

Quote from: picowatt on April 11, 2016, 11:43:11 AM

See, admitting being wrong was not that hard after all. I am proud of you...

Now, using Faraday's law which states that the induced voltage is directly proportional to the rate of change of the magnetic flux, would it not be logical to predict that when the rate of change of the magnetic flux is at a minimum, the induced voltage will also be at a minimum?

PW - You and TK are wrong!!!

Brad even proved it in his last video. You have incorrectly inerpreted Basic Science 101 for preschoolers.

I am not wrong, but you believe in your fairy tales...

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

tinman · « **Reply #1734 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:56:56 AM »

Quote from: minnie on April 10, 2016, 04:53:06 PM

I can see this as becoming known as the "Junkie-Tinman Law"

Are you and MH related monnie?-i mean minnie
I see you skipped out on answering the simple question about induction

Brad

picowatt · « **Reply #1735 on:** April 11, 2016, 12:00:37 PM »

Quote from: EMJunkie on April 11, 2016, 11:47:02 AM

PW - You and TK are wrong!!!

Oh really?

Both TK and Tinman stated the correct scope capture was the one showing 90 degrees of phase shift.

You have now changed your answer to be in step with theirs, so it seems that all of you are now in agreement that the correct answer to Tinman's question regarding which of the two scope captures was correct is the one showing the 90 degree phase shift.

So what's the problem?

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1736 on:** April 11, 2016, 12:03:28 PM »

PW - Youre still Wrong, and still wont admit to it.

You see, Brads circuit was never in question. Its TKs explanation of it.

Which you seem to support. Emphatically, with no evidence at all to show other wise.

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1737 on:** April 11, 2016, 12:04:52 PM »

You see PW, when youre wrong, and know it, you really should admit to it!

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

EMJunkie · « **Reply #1738 on:** April 11, 2016, 12:05:53 PM »

Not admitting to it, really isnt a good show of your character.

Chris Sykes
hyiq.org

shylo · « **Reply #1739 on:** April 11, 2016, 12:09:10 PM »

"Then there is the magnetic fields to consider-both the PMs field,and the primary coils field. The PMs field remains the same polarity,but varies in time- where the primary coil is the view point. The primaries magnetic field however,alternates in polarity over each cycle. We now have an effect where the two fields will be in bucking mode through 1/2 of each cycle,and in attraction mode during the other half of the cycle,and yet we see no such distortion in the secondaries wave form,where one half of he secondaries wave form should increase due to the bucking fields strength increase,and the other half of the secondaries wave form should decrease,due to the two attracting fields of the other half of the cycle. But in stead,we see an increase on both 1/2 cycles on the secondary,but a decrease in the primaries current draw-even though the primary coil is now doing more work."
Hi Tinman, Thanks for that video, I don't know much about this stuff and was impressed how drastically the inductance can be changed.
My thinking is that by adding the magnet stand, when the poles are attracting the approaching magnet is adding to the secondary, when the poles are repelling the field of the primary is being compressed back towards itself thereby increasing the secondary also . So that to me is why both halves of the cycle have an adding effect.
I would have like to seen what would have happened if you inserted the big block with the magnet stand in place.
Great work artv

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Joule Thief 101 (Read 944364 times)

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

picowatt

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

picowatt

Re: Joule Thief 101

tinman

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

picowatt

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

tinman

Re: Joule Thief 101

picowatt

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

EMJunkie

Re: Joule Thief 101

shylo

Re: Joule Thief 101