Joule Thief 101

[MileHigh]

@ all.
I have modified the below diagram to satisfy bub bub.

Brad

Here you go bubba, I fixed your double mistake.  Open your eyes.

Work on your bloody communication skills.

[wattsup]

@all

Another @tinman vid left in the dust while Mr. Faraday retakes the stage. Just not enough time to read the thread and try to respond and the thread just flies a few more pages. Just full of crap. Always the same thing. Well Faraday said this, said that, WTF gives a shit. We are in 2016 and you guys are still stuck in the 1800s hahahahaha. Good luck with that. Sucking on a Faraday Pop is surely not the way to advance to OU.

What Faraday did not explain to you Brainiacs is WHY THE FUCK THERE IS A PHASE CHANGE ILLUSION. But I'll let you guys figure it out with the checkmate "electron flow" model we have inherited you will never explain it just as the same electron flow model cannot explain simple AC. The lack is all tied into the same weakness of this EE construct. But please try as you might. Fit that big box into that tine hole.

So only Mags got even close to providing some "constructive" discourse but his post is way back now and lost in this page by page shuffle of nothingness. Too bad because it had substance and it started to answer @tinmans questions. Started too. There are other points but forget it. His vid is way back now.

Bahhhh. What is the use of trying to talk on these threads. No use at all when guys only want to argue irrelevance.

wattsup

[tinman]

Brad, I have quoted more than enough references.

If I wanted to fill the bucket with water, what would i have to know prior to filling the bucket with water?

That I need Water and a Bucket.

I would need suficent water, to fill the bucket.

Required Materials and Quantitys to complete a task. Certain relationships are also needed, all items are necessary to be in proximity to each other before completing the task.

It is the Change in Flux (ϕ) that Induces and EMF, but with any Change in Flux (ϕ) an associated EMF is also Present. EG: A moving Magnetic Constitutes an Electric Field...

Each EMF is 180 out of phase. Lenz's Law.

And, as I have also very clearly shown, the Phase relationships are very much dependant on Complex Impedances. Although E₂ will be 90 Degrees to the Flux (ϕ), I₁ might be 120 Degrees.

I disagree, 90 Degrees is what your Circuit was showing. Its not Predicted. Again, its a Phase relationship, thats necessary, necessary to know, measure in some cases.

This phase relationship can be changed! It can change the system!

This is not a "Predicted" quantity. Its a Required aspect!


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Ok Chris,i will try and explain where you are going wrong,and why TKs answer is correct,and that it is Faradays law that predicts it.

Quote: Faraday's law of induction is a basic law of electromagnetism predicting how a magnetic field will interact with an electric circuit to produce an electromotive force (EMF)—a phenomenon called electromagnetic induction. It is the fundamental operating principle of transformers, inductors, and many types of electrical motors, generators and solenoids.Faraday's law states that the EMF is also given by the rate of change of the magnetic flux:



Now here is what the added Lenz law part says
Quote: Lenz's law, formulated by Heinrich Lenz in 1834, describes "flux through the circuit", and gives the direction of the induced EMF and current resulting from electromagnetic induction.The induced electromotive force in any closed circuit is equal to the negative(your 180* phase relationship) of the time rate of change of the magnetic flux enclosed by the circuit.

So here is where i think you are going wrong with thinking TKs answer is wrong.

Using Faradays law of induction to describe what is happening in the circuit i provided(as TK did),is the correct law to use. The reason for this is,the secondary coil is open,and there is no closed loop or current flow through the secondary that is needed to use Lenz's inclusion in Faradays law of induction.

Faraday's law states that the EMF is also given by the rate of change of the magnetic flux:
Lenz's law describes "flux through the circuit"and gives the direction of the induced EMF and current resulting from electromagnetic induction.

The secondary coil in my schematic is clearly open,and so it is Faradays law of induction that is used to predict the very wave form i showed with the attached scope shot,where the peak of current(top and bottom part of the blue trace),shows the maximum field strength of the magnetic field around L1,but also shows that the magnetic field at that point is not changing in time. When the magnetic field dose not vary/change in time,then that is the very point there will be 0 volts(EMF) across the secondary/L2. I have once again included the scope shot with circuit in question,and show you a vertical line where there is 0 volts across the secondary at the very point where the current /magnetic field peaks--which is where the magnetic field dose not change in time-even  though that time is very brief.

In normal circumstances-using an off the shelf transformer,we would see a 90* phase shift between the current/magnetic field on the primary,and the EMF across the secondary,where the secondary is open. If the secondary has a resistive load placed on it,and now a current flowing through it,then the EMF across that secondary will line up(very close to)the current through that secondary. That is when you will see the 180* phase relationship between the primary EMF and the secondaries EMF--and also the current for the primary and secondary.

So to sum up,as the secondary coil is open on the schematic and scope shot in question, TKs answer is absolutely correct,and using Faradays law of induction in this case is also absolutely correct.

Hope that clears that up.


Brad

[tinman]

Here you go bubba, I fixed your double mistake.  Open your eyes.

Work on your bloody communication skills.

Work on your own understanding and reading skills MH

To quote my reference to the posted diagram--which had nothing at all to do with any waveform produced by the generator sketch--> thats right MH-->nothing to do with a wave form production.

Quote: --->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

[minnie]

 
You can never really trust anything. We've got a new saw,Stihl 4mix, it runs on
2stroke mix and sounds like a 4stroke....who'd a thought it?