Lasersaber strikes again. A joule thief king ?

[conradelektro]

I wanted to go back to a basic Joule Thief but with a third winding for power feed back.

There was little success, it seems that one can not really feed back power. Use of the third winding changes the frequency of the circuit and can reduce power consumption (by up to 20%) because of a lower frequency (less pulses per second --> less power consumption).

See the attached circuit:

When using this low supply Voltage (0.3 to 1.5 Volt) LED2 is not necessary (to protect the transistor) and causes unclean switching. But its light seems to be free. Having the LED2 in place does not change the power consumption.

LED3 could be a diode, but in this circuit a LED reduces power consumption more than a diode (but both reduce the frequency, the LED more so).

Using a full bridge rectifier with winding 3 did not give any positive results, LED3 seems to be enough.

Connecting winding 3 somehow to the base of the transistor (instead of to the negative rail) did not give better results and LED3 will be dimmer.


If there is progress it is NOT a third winding for power feedback. May be copper strips on the coil will help? I will go back to a Joule Ringer type circuit (very many turns for winding 2 in order to have high Voltage e.g. for a 220 V or 110 V LED lamp) and copper strips.

Greetings, Conrad

[d3x0r]

If there is progress it is NOT a third winding for power feedback. May be copper strips on the coil will help? I will go back to a Joule Ringer type circuit (very many turns for winding 2 in order to have high Voltage e.g. for a 220 V or 110 V LED lamp) and copper strips.

Greetings, Conrad

The foils are connected to the 'third winding', not the driving side...

[conradelektro]

The foils are connected to the 'third winding', not the driving side...

@d3x0r: please see the attached circuit. It is my way of "translating" copper strips to a Joule Ringer. The main argument is that the bigger winding (5.9 mH in the original) has no connection to copper strips. It is the smaller winding (2.6 mH in the original) which is connected to the copper strips.

In a Joule Ringer the smaller winding is driven by the collector of the transistor.

The original has only two windings. (A Joule Ringer also has only two windings.)

If you have a different opinion, I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Greetings, Conrad

[d3x0r]

@d3x0r: please see the attached circuit. It is my way of "translating" copper strips to a Joule Ringer. The main argument is that the bigger winding (5.9 mH in the original) has no connection to copper strips. It is the smaller winding (2.6 mH in the original) which is connected to the copper strips.

In a Joule Ringer the smaller winding is driven by the collector of the transistor.

The original has only two windings. (A Joule Ringer also has only two windings.)

If you have a different opinion, I would be interested to hear your reasoning.

Greetings, Conrad

OKay well; the joule thief/ringer requires 2 for its own driving purposes... and while you can put a load on that to block enough current to get a higher voltage from the collapsing field; you can get much higher voltages using a (I'd call it) secondary separate from the driving...
The akula project has a single coil, because the driving function is part of the semiconductor part... So to use a joule theif sort of self trigging oscillator you do need an extra winding for the base pickup sensor (thing).


your plan of attack looks good; could work

I'd use another pickup; but then again that coil is the lower inductance side... I think you end up with the foils attached to the W1 ... even though it's isolated with the 100k resitor and... I dunno that might work


well I don't know how you'd loop the energy back that way...


---
but I don't really comprehend how the foils would play a role...
1) they're lowest inductance/highest current... maybe a way of leaking some current into higher voltage?
2) they should be close enough to have a capacitive effect also
3) trying to figure otu the induced current paths... one side or the other ends up opposing that ends 'natural' polarity at that point;  and that means the secondary will be somewhat directional.... like just reversing the leads doesn't reverse the polarity...

[ramset]

Some unusual effects in Sliders replication/investigation are being investigated here

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2436.msg38416;topicseen#msg38416

thx
Chet