Prof. Steven Jones (PhysicsProf) JT variant

[ltseung888]

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8227-dr-steven-e-jones-jt-variation.html

[poynt99]

I thought it might be worthwhile seeing that the GL/SJ Joule Thief runs perfectly fine without a diode or LED in series with the load. I've made this simulation with a 100 Ohm resistive load. Measuring Pout now becomes a lot easier.

I also have this running with your component tweaks, where Rload is 9.8k, Rb is 2k, V2 is 3V, and the series battery resistor (R6) is 3.1 Ohms.

Steve, I would encourage you to try this and see if:

a) it still runs,
b) it still gives you a COP>1 measurement.

Regards,
.99

[PhysicsProf]

  Thanks for this question, .99.

  I recall having looked at this approach (without LED or diode in the output leg of the circuit) some time ago, but I'm certainly willing to take another look.  I'm in the middle of another project at the moment, but plan on some new observations early next week.

Thanks again,
Steve

[ltseung888]

I can take away the LED at the Joule Thief Output Leg on my FLEET prototypes and they run fine.

However the Power Waveforms look different.  I would treat such as different circuits for my analysis.

[PhysicsProf]

I can take away the LED at the Joule Thief Output Leg on my FLEET prototypes and they run fine.

However the Power Waveforms look different.  I would treat such as different circuits for my analysis.

Sure, but here's the question then -- Do you find a COP > 1 with this LED removed?
If so, then .99's suggestion is a step towards another measurement technique!

[PhysicsProf]

I thought it might be worthwhile seeing that the GL/SJ Joule Thief runs perfectly fine without a diode or LED in series with the load. I've made this simulation with a 100 Ohm resistive load. Measuring Pout now becomes a lot easier.

I also have this running with your component tweaks, where Rload is 9.8k, Rb is 2k, V2 is 3V, and the series battery resistor (R6) is 3.1 Ohms.

Steve, I would encourage you to try this and see if:

a) it still runs,
b) it still gives you a COP>1 measurement.

Regards,
.99

OK, I've removed the LED, as you suggested.  It rings, although there are significant changes as we shall see.

Photo shows the scope traces for V across Rload -- left is with LED in, right is with LED removed.  Clearly the scope trace changes -- the frequency goes from 152.1 kHz with LED to 182.5kHz without LED, Vpp goes from 2.22 V to 4.44 V (note that the scale left is 0.5 V/div and 1 V/div on the right).  Of course, the pattern changes dramatically as one can see.

 Conditions:  Rload is 986ohms, Rb = 48.6k.  Vbatt = 1.62V.  Then I replaced the battery with a 10,000 uF cap to provide the input energy -- permitting a straightforward determination of the INPUT ENERGY (without using a DSO).  Thus, I like to use a cap for the input energy rather than a battery -- this also permits rapid comparisons when changes are made in the circuit.   (The second photo shows the circuit running off a 10,000 uF cap.  It is now a very straightforward circuit.)

For example, with the 10,000 uF cap charged initially to 1.62V, the LED glows for 46 seconds then the circuit continues to "ring" as seen on the DSO for a total of 1min 44s.  (The scope pattern, V across Rload, changes about the time the LED goes "out", but the circuit continues to ring as seen on the scope.)

Same conditions except removing the LED, the scope shows that the circuit rings for a lesser time = 51 seconds.

So, yes, the circuit changes quite dramatically without the LED, but still rings.

Now, .99, you said with this change,

Measuring Pout now becomes a lot easier.

If you will then explain how you would measure Pout with this change, I'll do it and calculate Eout/Ein.  
I'm looking forward to your suggestion for Pout; thanks.

[ltseung888]

Sure, but here's the question then -- Do you find a COP > 1 with this LED removed?
If so, then .99's suggestion is a step towards another measurement technique!

If I use the Average Output Power over Average Input Power as determined by the csv file of the oscilloscopes, I do get COP > 1.

By the way, if I replace the battery with a capacitor, the waveforms changed significantly.  I just treat the capacitor case as a different circuit.  

The fun continues.

Edit:  I did the actual experiment for your information.  I removed the LED on the Joule Thief.  The resulting COP from average power ratios was -3.84.  The negative sign came from the negative average Input Power.  See the attached xls file for details.

[poynt99]

Steve,

May I ask that you perform the measurement to answer part b)?

Unless the measurement still comes back COP>1, there is no point in trying the alternate method I will propose.

The fact that the circuit runs for about half the time on a capacitor with the LED removed makes sense doesn't it? Power is being delivered for only half the time WITH the LED due to the half-wave conduction of current.

Thanks,
.99

[PhysicsProf]

Steve,

May I ask that you perform the measurement to answer part b)?

Unless the measurement still comes back COP>1, there is no point in trying the alternate method I will propose.
...

Thanks,
.99

Lawrence claims that the "the measurement still comes back COP>1" for his device -- I think we would all like to encourage him to try another measurement method, and so I again encourage you to disclose your "alternate method" for determining Pout.  (Why are you being so secretive about it, .99?)

As for my measurements with the Tektronix 3032 reported a long time ago, I noted that these were "evidence for" (not proof of!) ou.    I've been developing alternate measurement methods also, and I'd like to see what you have up your sleeve.   I guess I'm not interested in traveling a fairly long distance up to the university to use the Tek 3032 just to see what it would give at this time...  I am doing other projects.  And I don't see why this measurement should be a requirement for your disclosing your "alternate method."

Why are you keeping your "alternate method" so close to the chest?  Out with it, man! Let's give it a try.

[ltseung888]

Lawrence claims that the "the measurement still comes back COP>1" for his device -- I think we would all like to encourage him to try another measurement method, and so I again encourage you to disclose your "alternate method" for determining Pout.  (Why are you being so secretive about it, .99?)

As for my measurements with the Tektronix 3032 reported a long time ago, I noted that these were "evidence for" (not proof of!) ou.    I've been developing alternate measurement methods also, and I'd like to see what you have up your sleeve.   I guess I'm not interested in traveling a fairly long distance up to the university to use the Tek 3032 just to see what it would give at this time... 

Dear Prof. Jones,

I hope that you had a chance to study my edited reply to show that COP >1 when LED at the Joule Thief was removed.

I shall leave the calorimeter technique to you.  It is likely that I may be wearing a "long-lasting" LED Hat or driving a "Self-Powered" Electric Car very soon.  Another development is the "commercially resonance conditioned" batteries for toys.  Some toys using two or three AA batteries are now being converted to use one AA battery with the FLEET technology.  The expected life of the single AA battery will be much longer.

I fully expect the product from the South African Company being investigated by Sterling Allan to use similar lead-out energy techniques.  Thus my focus is to produce a "commercial resonance condition" FLEET for some specific toys – so that all qualified manufacturers can copy and improve.  I no longer care about the Overunity or COP > 1 search.  The Negative Power Waveform is my new focus. It is likely to confirm the theory of Lead-out or Bring-in Energy directly.

Please continue your alternative measurement technique research with poynt99 and others.  I already accepted my many FLEET prototypes with their Power Waveforms showing Output Energy is more than Input Energy.  To me, the search for proof-of-concept Overunity devices is over.  Hopefully, I may give a commercially implementable FLEET to the World on some specific toys and do not upset the teams who have spent much valuable effort and resources.

May God Guide us all.

[ciucianebbia]

I'm dusting off this thread to report an effect that's new to me, using the tapping center and Avramenko plug on the secondary. Here is what I found in detail.

Center tapped secondary
Ferrite coil, old tv txf, one leg, the primary, wiring 6 mt of 0,1mm diam. copper wire CW
the other leg, the secondary, 2 coils of 12mt anyone, same wire diameter, wired CW and CCW
Primary: L1 – 4 ohm - 28mH – 6 mt   CW
Secondary L2  - half coil: 7.5 ohm – 97mH  -  12 mt CW
Secondary L3  - half coil: 7.5 ohm – 101mH   12 mt CCW 

Now connect the two halves of the secondary in order to have the lowest possible impedance; to confirm, measure the impedance of the primary after short-circuiting the secondary: if things have been done correctly you will have no variations on the primary.
The place where the two secondary coils connect to each other is your center tapped.

Prepare an oscillator circuit, a joule thief or the Steven E. Jones circuit and connect primary and secondary as usual, as in the attached circuit. Place the oscilloscope probe on the center tapping of the secondary: you will find a sine wave with a nice amplitude and a frequency between 140 and 200KHz. Place an Avramenko plug at this point and measure the voltage on the diodes. Between 80 and 140 volts, not bad for a 1.2 volt battery. At this point I tried:

- to charge some batteries connected to the diodes: it charges slowly, but a reduction in the main input can be observed (from 6mA consumption to 3mA); another mA is gained by grounding the negative of the batteries being charged; charged directly or via a neon that discharges at approximately 4-5Hz

- connect a 1:1 transformer to the center tapped and put the other pole of the primary to earth; on the secondary I obtain, after a diode bridge, a voltage to charge a battery and also in this case reduce consumption from 6mA to 3mA

- connect an LM2596 dc-dc transformer after the 2 diodes of the Avramenko plug: even though there is a high voltage there is no way to obtain anything in output

At this point I don't know how to move forward and what to try. Suggestions ? Ideas?


​Ciao raga

Mauro

[Chet K]

Sir
Perhaps a few pointers from these  TinselKoala joule thief  builds ?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X9wxuRZV-Ro
And here running on "depleted " AAA battery putting out over 500 volts
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vG9W2xUReg4

[Chet K]

Yes I understand that Avramenko is effect you are interested in getting feedback on,

While we wait ( consider this a bump).

TinselKoala shows very impressive effect with Joule thief "wireless "? ( running a pulse motor)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kPt7xbmHXfY

Respectfully
Chet K

[Allcanadian]

TinselKoala shows very impressive effect with Joule thief "wireless "? ( running a pulse motor)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kPt7xbmHXfY

It's a well presented and entertaining video but like many other video's the important information was missing in my opinion.

What is a Joule Thief?... a JT is a boost converter.
A boost converter is a switch mode DC to DC converter that takes an input voltage and boosts or increases it. A boost converter is sometimes called a step-up converter since it "steps up" the source voltage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter

What was TinselKoala demonstrating?. He was demonstrating how a JT can raise the output voltage to power devices which wouldn't operate at lower voltages. In effect, an energy scavenger circuit which can raise the potential of otherwise unusable or wasted energy.

I got the impression TK may have been trying to demonstrate how some people could be tricked by a circuit with no battery. However his video had the opposite effect on me and there are two possibilities...
1) TK demonstrated how some people could be fooled by a misunderstood concept and a hidden source.

2) TK demonstrated how some people could be fooled by a misunderstood concept like FE and a hidden natural energy source.  As many FE inventors claimed there not creating energy there converting or transforming energy already present all around us.

In fact, many FE inventors used the analogy of a heat pump which does not create heat it moves heat energy. We could say a heat pump scavenges low level heat from outside and concentrates it inside our house. Just as a supposed FE device would scavenge low potential energy from outside the device and concentrate it inside the device.

AC

[PhysicsProf]

Thank you for the continued discussion.
The "old group" which was working on this line of research seems to be mostly gone now,
but I'm glad there is continuing interest.

[T-1000]

Hi all,

Since the discussion is still ongoing... Everyone still remember SJR looper flashlight - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7D_9Ill2wM https://lasersaber.org/projects/f/sjr-looper
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2930.0
The circuit essentially is energy recycling circuit (which makes COP 0.98+ and is always less than COP 1 due losses) instead of wasting BEMF/reactive power or transfering it back to grid as losses.
Wish every conventional circuits would do the same so we would have very energy efficient devices all around us..

Cheers!

[NickZ]

   Yes, but there is no free energy, there, just a more efficient device.
But we are after OU and self running, instead. And, to learn how to tapp into that sea of energy that is everywhere.
   Those that don't believe in the Aether and the tapping if this "Cosmic Soup", mentioned by Tesla as a source, will never have free energy.

   NickZ

[Apecore]

Hi all,

Since the discussion is still ongoing... Everyone still remember SJR looper flashlight - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7D_9Ill2wM https://lasersaber.org/projects/f/sjr-looper
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2930.0
The circuit essentially is energy recycling circuit (which makes COP 0.98+ and is always less than COP 1 due losses) instead of wasting BEMF/reactive power or transfering it back to grid as losses.
Wish every conventional circuits would do the same so we would have very energy efficient devices all around us..

Cheers!

Hi T1000,
Nice information, what some people dont understand is when you can ad a Load somewhere the efficiency still could be very high.
When this load can do work at cop=0.98 its in my opinion due to normal circuit FE

[Allcanadian]

T-1000

Since the discussion is still ongoing... Everyone still remember SJR looper flashlight - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7D_9Ill2wM https://lasersaber.org/projects/f/sjr-looper
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2930.0
The circuit essentially is energy recycling circuit (which makes COP 0.98+ and is always less than COP 1 due losses) instead of wasting BEMF/reactive power or transfering it back to grid as losses.
Wish every conventional circuits would do the same so we would have very energy efficient devices all around us..

Thanks for the link.

The video shows another important concept. If we connect a source like a small capacitor directly much of the lower potential energy goes unnoticed and is considered unusable. Where an energy scavenging circuit like a JT can make 99% of the energy "usable" down to the last mV.

For example, a while back I was doing some solar panel energy scavenging experiments. Normally we need 13v to charge a 12v battery from a solar panel so 13v is the minimum cut in. However if we add a JT/boost converter the solar panel can keep charging a 12v battery from solar panel voltages as low as 0.5v. In fact the solar panel can even charge the battery from star/moon light. By all appearances anyone who saw this concept working might think it's free energy but we know better.

My theory is a free energy device is just a device which concentrates the energy from many other weaker or smaller energy sources similar to a JT. Not an energy generator but an energy concentrator.

AC