First, I want to again thank Lasersaber and his Super Joule Ringer 2.0 design. This would not be possible without that design being offered.
Introducing the SJRC!! Super Joule Ringer Charger!
I have uploaded a video of a 1.0 version of the SJRC I'm happy with. I'm separating this in terms of a different circuit, as it bares little resemblance and function to the original LS design.
This circuit, will drive 7 - 7.5w 120v LED's at a measured 85% brightness AND charge batteries at the same time!!! All the aspects are shown in the video and I've included a current schematic with all the values. I must point out that the shown values are totally "tuned" for 7 bulbs and this will not work "exactly" the same otherwise. Caps across the Pri and Sec are Required and L3 must be a certain value based on load. I mention cap values for 1 bulb and no L3 is needed.
I only had batteries to charge 3.7 and 9v currently so I'll get more cells to find the optimal charge Voltage for batteries (guessing 48v range).
I'm happy with this circuit as it runs very efficiently, near full output, dual function of charging and all for 18.2w!? So, 7 x 400 (-25 for error) Lumens = 2800 total lumens for 18.2w ---153 lumens per watt!! That's even with Cree's newest and world's most efficient LED. But we can charge batteries too!?!?
Hope this helps someone replicate or find more improvements to this.
Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCfeuzMyfdI&feature=youtu.be
Thanks, PB
That's not quite current and correct on Cree's highest efficiency as they have up around 254 Lumen's per watt. At least that's what they've had roughly in the lab for over a year. In production units the last I checked are around 180 Lumens per watt. I haven't checked all their models but that was the last I heard a few months ago on the XM-L. I've got one of those in a U-bin (their highest BIN) and it is extremely bright when running around 9 or 10 watts. It's easily like a 60 watt bulb equivalent.
And a comment about efficiency of this latest overall circuit Lasersaber has. The actual LED's in these units are likely XM-L models unless they are using multiple LED's. Nearly all high power LED's like these run on roughly 3.5 to 4 volts. The circuitry inside those bulbs needs to take 120 VAC down to that much lower DC voltage and so in that process you lose some efficiency. Which is to say when you take that into account this is even more amazing to see that much light out of this setup.
I think this latest circuit from LS is definitely worth looking more at. Have you put a scope on the output to the batteries being charged? Just curious what that output looks like. Apologize if this is shown in your vid and as I didn't have time to watch it all right now.
BTW how much are they getting for those LED bulbs? From Lowe's?
@E2matrix, ty for your comments.
I hadn't seen that Cree's R@D is up to 250Lm/W in the lab. You are off a bit on Cree though. The XM-L are 100Lumens per watt and the highest currently available for purchase. http://ledsupply.com/creexml.php
Their next improvement, which got the US Govt. award for exceeding 150 Lumens per watt. The MG-T is just above this, but is NOT available for purchase. This was listed on their site, first, in June of 2011.
This newest claim they have for 256 lumens per watt was added to their site, appx, 19 days ago. I apologize for not seeing this most recent news. However, since we still can't buy the MG-T, it will be a couple years before the SC technology hits the market.
I fully understand that these bulbs have an internal circuit and am using that to an ADVANTAGE; rather than a loss. This is similar for the Choke, L3. As for the LED's in the buld, I would HIGHLY doubt they are XM-L's; as Cree bulbs are a little salty and not as reliable as Philips (walmart of LEDS). This is why they are not preferred where spectrum, Lux and PAR are most important; Marine SPS corals.
Last here, I wanted to note, that I separated this circuit design from LS as it bears NO similarity; in operation or functionality. The only remaining item is a single connection. LS, circuit is designed to run without ANY other parts and only self-oscillate. Adding a base bias, as I'd first done, is NOT a new circuit; so still LS design (this is like a paint job for the circuit). However, at this point, Requiring the caps, L3, charge circuit, bias, and NOT ever being "self-oscillative" (no base resistor); this cannot be considered the same.
IDK, I just wanted to put this out for others to possibly utilize. I had to fight with my friends to even list this; being patentable and marketable n' such. I've stated before I'm not a business man and don't care about making money, so I'm just offering this up.
Hope this helps,
Thanks
Oh, the bulbs were 10% off at lowes, so 17.99 ea. Walmart 7.5w LED's are cheaper (around 15) but I haven't tried "tuning" with those.
EDIT: the LED's in these bulbs are around 65 Lumens per watt, another confirmation of NOT being Cree's. 7.5w@490Lu = 65 Lumens per watt. Adding in circuit loss the LED's are probably 70 Lumens per watt. So, this circuit is getting 2x rated LED efficiency. IF the LED circuit was a LOSS then it would be less than 70lpw.
If we apply the same assumption as current and assuming I can "tune" to the new bulbs; A bulb of 250 Lumens per watt, should provide 500 Lumens per watt; if added to this circuit. I'll be anxious when they get these better bulbs out in a year or two for sure!
Thanks for the additional info. I didn't realize this was that different the LS's latest. I haven't looked that closely at LS's. It's really not that important compared to what you are doing here but my sources say the Cree XM-L T6 has a max. efficacy (I may have used the word efficiency which was wrong initially) of 160 lumens per watt and was released in April 2010. They also say Cree had 231 Lumens per watt in the lab since the middle of last year and like you said more recently up to a bit over 250 lumens / watt. I've been following Cree between about 2006 when they first broke on the scene to outstrip Luxeon and until about a year ago when I didn't follow them so closely any more but it seems about every 6 months we will be looking at higher efficacy LED's and more power. Some are saying the efficacy may top out around 300 Lumens per watt though (at least until something entirely new comes along) so we still have a lot to look forward to in terms of getting more light for our pennies ;)
If I had read your first post a bit more carefully I would have seen it was different. I was flying by so fast this AM I didn't even catch that it was a charger vs. a self oscillating light setup. I actually built one of Lasersaber's early Joule Ringers and had a lot of fun with that. I was getting several minutes run off of just the cap. Thanks again for sharing this interesting setup!
@e2matrix, I see too, your reference of efficacy. I'm with ya' on watching LED's as we should have more efficient conversion of electricity to light by now; lol, were due!
I posted a couple videos that are related to this circuit, from a design Pov.; also an explanation of operation. The last video, explanation, should probably be put in lasersabers' Joule Ringer thread; but it's not necessary to be posting multiple times for these smaller bits. But the explanation video DOES talk more with the Lasersaber Super Joule Ringer 2.0; though I cover SJRC aspects.
These two (sorry for being long) I assume can give someone the insight of how to "tune" the overall SJRC circuit and get similar results.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMtqqmEMtw8&feature=plcp
First is with Model T. It's long, but the whole time shown is 12v and appx .5A (slightly Less at end); so 6w. I show how to get as much of that to the "load" as possible by tuning. This is essential to "tuning" of the SJRC with the caps and L3 coil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YH9IZFbqaAM&feature=plcp
This is the explanation of circuit operation, again Mostly Lasersaber related; but shows operation, biasing, LED on 3v, comparison of 1 LED (over full bright) @ 12v with Lasersabers Joule Ringer 2.0 schema. (w/base mod / paint).
Last, I have to help a friend (I believe) with car troubles; but I am looking for another coil for this circuit. It's a bit more tricky for the SJRC, but I have a few thoughts; so I'll update with those as I get a chance to test another setup.
Also, I suppose a note, since the DC output / charger is decoupled and filtered (for the most part). Yes, you can feed appx. 40ma back to the source supply instead of charge; but that is terribly small to input. Yes, you can run a string of the 10mm white LEDs at full brightness, but again we already have 2800 lumens; so this is petty too. I'm still needing to acquire batts for higher charge testing, but the highest volts / ma ratio will be best; as this will net the most power (watts) through the DC out. E.g. in video was around 170mw @3.4v and 370mw @9v. If we could get 25ma through 36v that would then be .9w; all while not losing light (most technically increasing slightly).
Thanks
@Peanutbutter:
I looked at your videos and this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YH9IZFbqaAM&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YH9IZFbqaAM&feature=plcp) was particularly interesting.
Just for fun (because I had the coils from other experiments) I tried it with two big air coils (see the attached diagrams and photos which I also posted in the Joule Ringer thread http://www.overunity.com/10179/joule-ringer/msg321290/#new (http://www.overunity.com/10179/joule-ringer/msg321290/#new) ).
Please alow me to pose three questions, which you probably can answer based on your expertise (I am not an electronics engineer, just like to play with strange circuits):
1.) My transistor gets hot very easily and I wonder what your experience is in this respect? (I see you are running 1.2 Amperes through your circuit at 12 Volts and the transistor seems to manage without cooling.)
2.) I would like to hear your opinion concerning air core coils in this experiment? Why would air core coils be helpful or counter productive in this circuit? Or, what could one do in order to make it work nicely with air core coils?
3.) How can the capacitor values for the capacitors parallel to the coils be calculated or estimated? Is it the basic LC-oscillator formula?
Greetings, Conrad
First, I wanted to say good job on those air cores! Very nice construction, I'd have to say I like the larger diameter the best ;). Also, I suppose, I'm not an expert either; but time has offered opportunity to become well-rounded at least.
I'll see if I can help answer your questions to help if I can.
1)
Heating transistor = Hard switching = greater Pd (potential dissipation) inside the transistor. This can be related to 3 things primarily. First, a leading current phase relative to the voltage phase. Second, Improper phase of base signal relative to collector (instantaneous V/A values upon switching). Or Third, the junction capacitance's of the transistor are "coupled" into a series / parallel LCR; thus including current "Circulation" in the junction.
I will note, running a stock Super Joule Ringer as shown in that explanation video @ 12v and one bulb; WILL heat the transistor. Now it won't fry or anything, but I wouldn't imagine it would last long without a heatsink. However, the SJRC video, running all the load (and a bit more power); the transistor does NOT heat at all. It does not even require a heatsink. My best reference here, is with the starting Model T coil rambling; as the first setup shown dissipates a greater % of power through the switcher (eg- transistor). For another reference here. If I use the stock model T and a 3055 transistor Instead of the "built-in" one; @ 12v 1A, the transistor will fry within a couple minutes.
In your case specifically, with the higher operational frequency and low inductance; your most likely losing most from a Junction LCR inclusion and a bit off on the phase of the base signal.
2) Air core, the best and worst of both worlds, lol. They are nice, since we don't have core loss and yes; most technically air would be the best. The trick with air cores would be three fold. First, since (as related in explanation) the energy output is related to "charge stored" in L2 or the secondary; we need a high inductance. However, I pointed on Lasersabers' thread this still needs accomplished with Q in mind. Second, we don't want the Fo of the circuit to be anywhere close to transmission for loss of power there. If doing the SJRC type system, the frequency should be lower for better energy transfer and power output (e.g. lower Z of L2 = lower Z of output = more theoretical power can be had). Third, then is related to coupling; as we need higher coupling for best energy transfer (yes, dampened oscillations).
This is a bit of a side note, but a good time to point out. The SJRC, then DOES have a "bandwidth" of efficient operation; since we are dealing with Z values. Whereas the Super Joule Ringer, we do not have a bandwidth, UNLESS (key) it will self oscillate. If the circuit will self oscillate without a base tie, you will notice bandwidth related effects. However, of course, the SJRC cannot self -oscillate and does have bandwidth.
So, for an air core; you'd probably want opposing coil halves for both increased inductance and self capacitance (with lower R of course). I suppose this could be pancake (like tesla), helical or solenoidal. The primary will have greatest coupling to the secondary if wound around these secondaries. I would recommend even, winding opposing half coil primaries over each secondary half (center probably of two pancakes if they are used). Again for best coupling here, we want the primary to envelop a large portion of the secondary surface area. It will still take a fair bit of wire to accomplish this with enough Inductance and the wire should be as large as possible.
Another side note here, I suppose, but it is related to ALL of these designs. The voltage ratio of primary to secondary,( note V of secondary is not a direct relation of N1/N2 or V1/V2 or L1/L2 alone specifically) should not be overly great. Simply here, there is no reason to "step-up" in voltage much beyond the 120v load targets; as this will lead to other negative effects and less power is potentially available.
3)
Capacitor values, now there is where we start to create "tank" circuits and "bind" the primary, secondary and load. I tried to show this with the Model T coil and there are many things that could be taken. Note, though that we did not get a purple (V/A phase alignment / PF) spark until BOTH the primary and secondary were tuned to transfer the most power to the secondary and, of course, through the load.
Can we use standard LCR formulas? well, I would hesitate against that to some degree. Though all the formulas are obviously available, the math would be complex; if we considered the variable XL, coupling, Junctions of transistors, etc. The variation in just capacitance, resistance, voltage, hfe, switching time etc from the transistor is quite complex in this design; an in most cases the transistor is altering the wave form from these dynamic changes. Also, I cannot stress this enough, if you DO make a "resonant" (e.g. phase aligned) L1 or L2 the current IN the coil would be highest and is not necessarily what we want; if say we want power to circulate elsewhere (e.g. model T coil in the spark / load). I would recommend (since again we have an advantage of audibility) tuning with V/A readings, lumen meter and your ear. E.G a nice clean smooth sound is a better interaction with the L1 L2 and transistor. Whereas a rough sound can be a beat of two frequencies, improper phasing (more notable with darlington and its' larger phase delay in some cases), or even core saturation in certain cases.
At the end of the model T video I refer to a Quasi-resonance, of sorts. Since all these coils are highly dampened, we cannot have free oscillation. Since these are below transmission, we are not dealing with antenna. Since, the Velocity factor of these designs is not altered in any great degree; we are dealing with lumped mode inductors and not a slow- wave resonance (Corum). Since we are dealing with Lumped mode inductors, all formulas will say current is even across coil; however I do show (with the T) "moving" the relative current in the secondary with various setups.
To apply the same "tuning" I did with the model T to more of this circuit we can easily get the info we need. Dissipation at switch = Transistor heat. Light of bulb in lumens = Power of spark. Lower power in @ same nominal lumens = better PF between the, now bound; primary, secondary and load. Of course the smooth sound applies the same to both.
I'll hesitate to provide exactly what I was looking for with tuning, to not take enjoyment out of playing ;). But, between the obvious "odd" capacitor ratio shown in schematic and model T video; I assume one could easily know what to do.
I hope this helps answer your questions and doesn't sound too nuts. Let me know if I need to explain something further or differently.
Thanks PB
Thinking about it and to add here. I've always enjoyed the model T and been in awe at the realization that Tesla picked up on all these things so early with his "disruptive discharge" coil. Actually he talks about some of the same tunings in his lectures when he was first doing the work.
I dug out my notes for his disruptive discharge as that design may actually work well with lasersabers' super joule ringer or the SJRC. He noted you can get all effects by adjusting frequency, current*, voltage*, primary and secondary coupling*, and capacity (only of secondary at that time)
Power in: Custom generator 10-20khz @24-30v and 30 amps (lol on amps) Sine wave
Primary: wound on wood spool (1"D x 4"L) 12ga B&S 2 half coils oppositely wound. Each half coil 24 turns per layer x 4 layers (96 turns per half)
Secondary: Wound on hard rubber (3 1/8"D x 1.18"W x 9.5"H) 24ga B&S 2 half coils oppositely wound. Gutta percha layer between wire layers. 10 turns per layer x 26 layers (260 turns per coil half). Secondaries placed on edges of 4" primary (appx. 1" apart after form thickness).
Entire coil was submerged in oil or fully wax encased (and lathed) secondary with earlier models.
this is an air core coil and design may help too. Just was on my mind to add I suppose.
@Peanutbutter:
Thank you very much for taking the time to answer in such a helpful way. I will try to integrate your suggestions into my existing and also into new air core coils.
The other builders (whom I see on YouTube and in the forums) seem to go for ferrite core transformers (for good reasons) and therefore we will have many results from this side. I kind of like air core coils because they have the aura of 19th century Frankenstein technology and therefore will try to go down this route as far as it takes me.
Greetings, Conrad
I was able to get another transformer running and a little different circuit. Again, able to charge batteries and light bulbs. Though, the improper coil design, coupling (since ferro core), extra wind, small wires and lower inductcance; amounts to being less 1 bulb and the v1.0 charging system.
It took quite a while to get the DC converter section to charge without taking any energy from the system and so a primary based charge system is not optimal, though could be used along with v1.0 if the L2 is large enough.
I think this coil should be easy to get, as toroidal power transformers are common. I show the model number and such on the video, but I'll put here again too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N1wVLtKHXw&feature=youtu.be
Mei AH Electrical and Industrial Model: ED10151R4 (A3032)
Primary 117v 60hz
Secondary 8.5v 600ma
Secondary 13v 2A
Secondary 13v 2A
Appx 4" OD 1.75" ID 1"H
Schematic and values shown below, hope this helps
Thanks PB
@Peanutbutter29:
In order to make sure that I understood your air core coil advice correctly I made a drawing of a coil with opposing coil halves.
The drawing is for a helically wound air core coil (e.g. wound onto a plastic pipe). I would like to ask you to check that this is what you meant?
I have no idea how it could be done with pancake type coils?
Greetings, Conrad
@ conradelektro Nice job with the representation! Yup! you have it correct. It's very similar to disruptive discharge in terms of winds, but inverted in terms of coupling. Don't run too fine of wire on the L2 though.
For pancake, your primary would be the the dielectric location if we were to compare the layers to a capacitor. So secondary halves would be the plates.
Also, at Stephan's request I posted a video with some scope shots. I hope it covers what was needed. I also, run the latest v1.1 on a regular 12v lead-acid for further power supply isolation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U-uepE19Lw
Also, I should point out. After doing a couple of these (and this one being 6 bulb max) I would say your gonna need 60mH PER BULB on the secondary for decent output. Again being related to energy stored in the L2. I could run more than 6, but not at a good light or power ratio; so I consider that a balance.
So, if you wanted to light 10 bulbs you need 600mH.
I believe the above will hold true if "properly" tuned with caps.
Last, I guess it was nice to see the wave form, thanks to Stephan for making me dig it out ;). I did expect a difference in the half cycles as shown, but was a bit different in shape than I'd visualized. I suppose that's the negative issues with this coil though.
Thanks, PB
EDIT: I added better annotations to the video at 3:30 to better explain switching. I hadn't looked at the wave really when shooting the video and didn't state the best. The L2 has a very nice "Ring down" too!
I also found a couple other video's with standard oscillator and Super Joule Ringer scope shots. There is NO similarity with my shots. I'd say for sure then, I'm not nuts with this tuning and what I'm doing, lol and Yay! ;)
After the above edit I thought I should add the video links showing other oscillator shots.
First, is a standard Lasersaber joule ringer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl3h5D5vpBA
Shots start close to 2:00
Second, is a nice video that shows 3 scope shots; A positive, 2 transistor positive, and lasersaber Super Joule Ringer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9hvkr2G9Lw
Shots through out.
Makes a good comparison of all the designs that way, an two Super Joule Ringer shots. There's a pretty large difference between those and the SJRC shots above.
Thanks, PB
Today I could wind a better primary coil with 50 turns of 1 mm2 litz wire. The performance is much better (brighter lights) but also the power consumption went up.
The circuit (see in my previous posts) seems to use about halve the Wattage as specified on the lamps, but the lamps are probably not exactly as bright as on the 220V mains (but close, it is hard to tell without a Lumen-meter).
I will now try to build an air core coil with opposing coil halves as suggested by Peanutbutter29. Since I have to buy a 150mm diameter evacuation tube (as a support for the windings) and the right wire it will take some time. The intention is to tune the coil and the circuit to 12V to 13V operation (on a 12 Volt solar power net).
The 220V LED lamps seem to work best and one can use them as bought (in other countries it would be 110V LED lamps which need slightly different coils, halve the step up factor between primary and secondary).
The 220V CFLs need some good Wattage (may be 2 to 3 Watts) to start if the built in circuit is left in place. The tubes alone start up at 50mA with 600 Volt (but of course very dimly).
@Peanutbutter and other experts: is litz wire for the coils a good idea?
Greetings, Conrad
The Litz can add some benefit for the HF coils your running now. If you get into lower frequencies (and / or) Ferro-cores and intend to tune the circuit as I'm suggesting; then you wouldn't really need litz as Fo is low. If you wanted an advantage still of parallel wires, you could use stranded audio or something; since it's diameter is around 20Khz and under for skin.
However, we still need a high inductance so solid core will offer the highest there. If someone used a high enough permeability core; then you could probably do stranded with a reasonable length. For air though, I might stay with tight wound solid core.
In general, dampening, coupling and lower Fo are counter-intuitive; however with this circuit, if tuned correctly, these are beneficial / required to a larger part. Of course with a ferro-core you can get too much coupling though and have saturation or loss issues. On the air side, the trick will be high inductance for low Fo.
Hope this helps,
Thanks, PB
Also, I uploaded some more scope shots, since I did such a bad job the first time. I got more shots and actually got what Stephan asked this time ;). Hopefully I show everything from all the places. Also, I show duty cycle and frequency with my meter. Finally I zoom in on the ring down oscillation, which I believe to be from a Junction interaction with the transistor as I spoke of.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-XoeFqDEJs&feature=youtu.be
Seems, the only thing varying is duty cycle. Should this then be considered more of a PWM??? Maybe I need to rename the design to SJ-PWM or something?
Thoughts anyone?
Thanks as always,
PB
wow! i wonder if this circuit could be made into a portable laptop/hand phone charger
On my way, I suppose I should add a note; for those who may do this.....
There May very well be discrepancies in drawings and videos from what specifically was used, of course. This could be improper numbers, inversions, reversions, P/N's etc. I'm sure those skilled in circuits know what may possibly not look correct and could very well be, in certain cases, what You may want.
If someone does attempt this be sure, if needed, to correct any Obvious" discrepancies to get the results Your looking for ;).
Adieu, PB
@Peanutbutter29
(http://www.overunity.com/profile/peanutbutter29.43743/)Hi,
I've been watching your videos on yt. Quite impressive. I left you a couple of comments- one just a minute ago regarding what I describe below. Perhaps it's a better idea to discuss this idea here.
As you know many have been experimenting with the ultra efficient lighting circuits but yours seems to stand out.
I've suggested repeatedly, to no avail, that the light and heat output from these experiments can be used to generate electricity. This may or may not be a good idea, I don't know. It's been knocked down by a few and it's been suggested that it's a good idea by others yet no one has tried it to any degree that I'm aware of. Granted solar cells and peltier devices are not efficient but your circuit is. It puts out a great deal of light and probably heat too with little input power. Therefore I suggest that you build a box lined with solar cells on the inside and lined with peltier devices on the outside to generate electricity from the light and heat you so efficiently provide. Perhaps you will be surprised and approach or exceed unity with this configuration. One thing that may contribute to success is having the correct light wave frequency output matched optimally to the solar cells. In other words the solars will perform better with the correct light wave frequency. What that is I don't know but perhaps lights with "natural light" output would work best. Additionally it will heat up inside so the box might have to be vented and peltiers may be useful in converting that heat to electricity as well.
I made a video Sunday about this very subject because of my frustration. Certainly I should shut up and just do it myself. Right? Well I'm involved in my own project that is off topic and you like many others experimenting in this area are configured for this already and need only to take the next step. If I can't find any takers my frustration may lead to me experimenting in this area because it fascinates me so much. But given that one of my personality defects :-[ doesn't allow me to have more than one thing going on at a time I continue to suggest it to successful experimenters in this area.
The video that I made Sunday isn't exclusively about ultra efficient lighting researchers not "doing what I ask" :( , it's about experimentation in alternative energy and the narrow focus that the experimenters have. I describe how systems that are built and tested often have multiple outputs that aren't fully exploited. Outputs often are in multiple frequency ranges, ranging from audio to light and all points between. In one of my own experiments running my pulse motor I generate electricity from what I called a resonator. The motor I built has a 120db output with a frequency range from 1kHz and it's harmonics to at least 15kHz. So I built a resonator from a pvc tube and piezo electric speaker and was able to light two led's. 8) Whooo hooo. Right? Well much more can be done with this but I have a greater goal that I won't elaborate about here. The point is that I tried to harness that energy and make use of it. I also have heat output but that's another story. So the heat and vibration I experience can be considered waste or as an opportunity. I can spend my time trying to eliminate it or I can try to utilize it.
Your intent may be entirely different than what I suggest. That is, I suspect you want light for cheap and that's cool but I see it as an opportunity to generate electricity for other use. Perhaps I'm wrong. :-\
Hope this helps in your endeavor. I will stay tuned to your channel in hopes of further developments. I'm not a big fan of the forums so you probably won't see much of me here.
Jim
aka yt user mnsman1 http://www.youtube.com/user/mnsman1