Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

[ltseung888]

Second test on Board 39 for Energetic Forum.  The COP was -1.99.  THe negative sign came from INPUT implying a feedback circuit.

The three test boards do not have a capacitor.  The cost of producing such in Shenzhen is low.  Material cost is less than USD1.00 and labor cost is less than USD2.00.  The whole board cost is less than USD3.00.  The box, packaging and instrutions is USD1.00.  The shipping cost (normal air mail) to USA from Hong Kong is USD4:00.  The total cost even for small quantities is approximately USD11:00.  If we include a capacitor so that we can demonstrate the long lighting effect and a battery holder, the cost should be around USD15:00.

If we let the underdeveloped Countries do the winding of the toroid and the soldering, the cost may be even less.  Every school or research institute with oscilloscopes in the World should be able to afford USD15 to check out whether electron motion can be led out.  We are encouraging replicators and improvers.

One more test (triple test) with AA battery as power source, these three boards for the  Forums should be ready for shipment.

May the Almighty guide us to benefit the World.

[Neo-X]

My joule thief variation. 

[conradelektro]

My joule thief variation. 

@Neo-X: A YouTube user calling himself Xee2, see http://www.youtube.com/user/xee2vids/videos?view=0 , shows a lot of interesting Joule Thief type circuits. And they are nicely documented in his videos.

Instead of the "LED or lamp" one can always put a "diode and a rechargeable battery" to be loaded. The battery might even work better after such a loading (due to desulfation or other chemical reactions, because of the relatively high Voltage spikes tickling the battery), but no OU has ever been proven.

Itseung888 shows scope shots, but most of them are inconclusive, because the resolution is too small. I found a usable scope shot in Itseung888's post #234 in this thread where I can show that there is no OU, see the attached drawing.

One has to look at the area to see that "on average" the input power is bigger than the output power. Itseung888 seems to look at the hight of the spikes. "Momentarily" the output might be higher than the input, but "on average" that is not true.

Greetings, Conrad

[ltseung888]

@Neo-X: A YouTube user calling himself Xee2, see http://www.youtube.com/user/xee2vids/videos?view=0 , shows a lot of interesting Joule Thief type circuits. And they are nicely documented in his videos.

Instead of the "LED or lamp" one can always put a "diode and a rechargeable battery" to be loaded. The battery might even work better after such a loading (due to desulfation or other chemical reactions, because of the relatively high Voltage spikes tickling the battery), but no OU has ever been proven.

Itseung888 shows scope shots, but most of them are inconclusive, because the resolution is too small. I found a usable scope shot in Itseung888's post #234 in this thread where I can show that there is no OU, see the attached drawing.

One has to look at the area to see that "on average" the input power is bigger than the output power. Itseung888 seems to look at the hight of the spikes. "Momentarily" the output might be higher than the input, but "on average" that is not true.
*** PLEASE USE THE .XLS FILES ***

Greetings, Conrad

Please examine the .xls files.  Just looking at the waveforms is not conclusive.  The .xls files contain 15000 sample points.  EXCEL can average these sample points easily.  It is much more accurate than your picking one waveform and making conclusions.  Please also note that when you use average area, the sum of the positive and the negative areas will give you a much lower numerical value.  In particular, the NET negative area will imply a feedback circuit.

I did not include the .xls file with every post because they take too long and sometimes exceed the 5000KB allowed in this Forum.  If you are interested in any particular one for detailed analysis, PM me and I shall email it to you.  Meanwhile pick any of the .xls files and do your calculation from there.

I believe the Forum Adminstrators have or have access to high end oscilloscopes that are better than the Atten Oscilloscopes in my possession.  They should be able to provide more conclusive results. 

At least 30 of such "triple checked boards" will be sent (or have been sent) to the top Uniersities worldwide.  They all have top end oscilloscopes.  It will take them time to come out with "conclusive statements".  Confirming Output Power > Input Power with their reputation at stake is not to be taken likely.

[ltseung888]

@Neo-X: A YouTube user calling himself Xee2, see http://www.youtube.com/user/xee2vids/videos?view=0 , shows a lot of interesting Joule Thief type circuits. And they are nicely documented in his videos.

Instead of the "LED or lamp" one can always put a "diode and a rechargeable battery" to be loaded. The battery might even work better after such a loading (due to desulfation or other chemical reactions, because of the relatively high Voltage spikes tickling the battery), but no OU has ever been proven.

Itseung888 shows scope shots, but most of them are inconclusive, because the resolution is too small. I found a usable scope shot in Itseung888's post #234 in this thread where I can show that there is no OU, see the attached drawing.

One has to look at the area to see that "on average" the input power is bigger than the output power. Itseung888 seems to look at the hight of the spikes. "Momentarily" the output might be higher than the input, but "on average" that is not true.

Greetings, Conrad

Please also re-examine your use of the ble area.  The correct blue area should be the area enclosed by the curve with the xero axis.  Did you make a mistake???