Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

[ltseung888]

Lawrence: thank you for posting the sample spreadsheet file. Am I correct that the file you posted only contained 10 sets of data points out of the 11250 sample total record length? Kind of stingy, isn't it, to not give me the whole 11250 points?

Please use the nov22a.xlsx file in
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1516.msg26471#msg26471


That file is too big for this forum.  You need to unzip it.




The sample file you mentioned with 10 sample points contains the parameter save values.  No analysis was done.


Examine case 4 in nov 22a.xlxs in particular.




That particular case has been reproduced.  We shall do more modifications around it.   My contacts at Tsinghua University suggested that I bring the oscilloscope-test-ready board to them.  They believe any additional measurement from the cheap Atten Oscilloscope may be a waste of time.  They have well qualified persons operating their top-of-line oscilloscopes.  Those results will be used to justify the claims.




I shall take that suggestion.  I do not have a way to access the expensive oscilloscopes.  Let Tsinghua University shine.

[TinselKoala]

@MH: re the Joe Newman  motor:

you said,

The "2000 pounds" means absolutely nothing.  Yes it takes some battery energy to get it spinning but after that it makes no difference and does not affect anything.

Does he really hook up the battery stack with the rotor at a standstill, and let the whole thing accelerate to running speed on the power from the battery stack alone?
Every Newman demo I've seen he has to give the wheel a big spin to get it started.


So we have a large heavy flywheel on good bearings, if somewhat roughly constructed. It's given a good spin initially and then it's supplied with, say, 200 Watts of power from the battery stack. Or even much less: all the batterypack has to do is to replace the friction losses, it doesn't have to accelerate the rotor, thanks to Joe.
Now you want to pump some water. You have a 2000 pound flywheel turning at some rpm maintaining a constant speed because it's being supplied with power from the batteries. Does the flywheel slow down when you start pumping? Could you detect, say, a 10 percent loss in RPM by eye and ear over the few minutes of water pumping? How much stored energy would that represent?
In the "zed is ded thred" I wound up looking up some water pump and head parameters. There are pump calculators that will tell you how much mechanical power in Watts is required to pump a certain flow rate to a certain head height. It's interesting to run the numbers. 20 kW, as I recall, is just about the same as a flow of 3500 gallons per minute to a head height of 10 meters, neglecting pump losses. Can that be right? That means that 200 W could pump 35 gpm to 30 feet of head....
Actually I see that is 'ballpark' correct: even assuming a 60 percent efficient pump you can pump 25 gpm to 30 feet of head on 240 Watts of mechanical power.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/pumps-power-d_505.html

So if your flywheel is running at equilibrium speed at 240 Watts input from the battery stack, and you then put a 240 watt mechanical load on the shaft, the rotor will then begin to slow down at its unpowered speed. Right? And a 2000 pound rotor will take a while to slow perceptibly even when its input power is taken away and used somewhere else.

[TinselKoala]

@Lawrence: is it possible for me to download the user's manual and technical information for your Atten oscilloscope?

The reason the universities are interested in your system enough to talk to you is because of your nice personality and your self-assurance. They are politely giving you the full opportunity to demonstrate your claims... or to fall on your face in public. In the event you are incorrect in your claims of OU, due to your equipment and analysis techniques and your misapprehensions, would you not like to find out this fact before you have sent out 30 boards for evaluation, met face-to-face with a room full of grad students, and spent money on travel and supplies? So I recommend strongly that you delay your plans a bit, until you can integrate your new-found knowledge completely into your thinking. You might even change your conclusions, if your data upon which they are based is correctly gathered and analyzed.

Those results will be used to justify the claims.

That is not a scientific attitude.
"Those results" may very well indicate that your claims are not justifiable. But you have already decided that they are, therefore you will conclude that the evaluations are incorrect somehow and failed to see what you clearly know is true.

ETA: Your "slide5.jpg" scopeshot is uninterpretable garbage. You are seeing "aliasing" artefacts due to the noisy signal and your scope's pixellated low-res display. The parameters include garbage in their values and can't be trusted. Does the scope compute the params based on the windowed display, or can you select the area for computation with cursors?
For clarity please remember to show only 2, 3, 4, or 5 complete cycles _unless_ you are doing frequency computations based on large numbers of cycles. Also please remember to put the channel zero reference line (offset) directly on a horizontal graticule line unless there is some good reason not to. Both your channels are DC coupled as is proper, but for some reason you have chosen to put the "T" for the trigger voltage value, right on a horizontal graticule line, rather than putting the channel baseline (the "2" with the little horizontal arrow indicating the zero reference) there.

ETA2: You speak English very well. May I ask, is it your first language, or do you speak Cantonese or Mandarin "at home"?  I wish I could learn a Chinese language; I am fascinated by the cultures and someday I hope to visit what we call "the Orient".

[ltseung888]

@Lawrence: is it possible for me to download the user's manual and technical information for your Atten oscilloscope?


*** http://www.atten.eu/media/catalog/product/pdf/User%20Manual%20ATTEN%20DSO.pdf

The reason the universities are interested in your system enough to talk to you is because of your nice personality and your self-assurance. They are politely giving you the full opportunity to demonstrate your claims... or to fall on your face in public. In the event you are incorrect in your claims of OU, due to your equipment and analysis techniques and your misapprehensions, would you not like to find out this fact before you have sent out 30 boards for evaluation, met face-to-face with a room full of grad students, and spent money on travel and supplies? So I recommend strongly that you delay your plans a bit, until you can integrate your new-found knowledge completely into your thinking. You might even change your conclusions, if your data upon which they are based is correctly gathered and analyzed.
That is not a scientific attitude.
"Those results" may very well indicate that your claims are not justifiable. But you have already decided that they are, therefore you will conclude that the evaluations are incorrect somehow and failed to see what you clearly know is true.

I know the professors at Tsinghua personally.  I gave lectures and got great receptions.  At that time, Mr. Lee Cheung Kin and I presented the Leading-out of gravitational energy.  Mr. Wang Shen He also presented his magnet only device.  We helped to explain one of their devices that "magnified Input 30 times" with the lead-out energy theory.  [size=78%]We went into political problems afterwards.[/size]




This time, the political problems have been removed.  The Chinese Academics have a different mentality from their Western counter-parts.  They love to check-out theories that "humble the Westerners".  If it were wrong, they just treat it as listening to another theory.  If right...... ??

[ltseung888]

Use of the twin timer in the "overunity" range to cut electricity bills.