Joule Thief

[jadaro2600]

I'm trying to account for the reasoning behind using a low voltage source when it is actually the current which issues the voltage spike in the collapsing magnetic field.

It would make sense that the current coming from two 1.5 volt batteries in series would be different from that of two in parallel.

I've tried using two in series, parallel and alone.  The lone battery seems to function best.  I do not know why this is.  Has anyone got any thoughts?

Additionally, the 1.5 volt source is common but it is also unconventional in that is attempts to wow us with it's small stature but it's irrelevant when it comes to being implemented in say, a vehicle with a 12 volt source such as a motor-home.  Even most "green"-houses have 12 or 24 volt outlets.  Shouldn't we consider the possibility of using a different source voltage?

It would also be interesting to know what's going through your heads on the matter of cheer current available and current used. As some of you have pointed out, the transistor is often acting in tandem with inductances - switching on and off at resonance ( as determined by loads and circuit resistance ); since the current available is most high compared to that which is used, it seems reasonable to say that a car battery could be used to power a JTC given the right transistor.

Why not light up a 48 inch tube..and then post your youtube video using it for lighting.  ( that would be a nice trick you know! ..actually using the light for lighting )

Anyway, it would be nice to get 2 48 inch tubes lit like they are in any standard florescent ballast circuit.  Does anyone have any current usage characteristics on the florotubes?

The idea here is a matter of watts ..not necessarily voltage, but some of are trying to cover large distances with voltages.

@jeanna,  you must have a macro setting on you camera?  is it digital? ..can't you possibly get the pictures of your waveforms in focus?

[innovation_station]

BUSY PLACE ROUND HERE ...

A NOTE BOUT YOUR FAKE CHARGE ...

IF YOU EXPERIENCE THIS...   FREQ IS TOOOOO HIGH ON OUT PUT ...  PUT IN A CAP DC FIRST ...

YOU WILL BE FINE .... 

I DID THIS WITH A SINGLE PULSE MOTOR COIL IN MY PULSE MOTOR THRED FROM A SMALL 12 BATTERY I CHARGED 3 ... 2 DEEP CYCLE  LARGE SOLAR ONES ... AND 1 SMALL SAME AS INPUT ...

YOU NEED THE CAP ..  ASWELL IT NEEDS TO USE POWER ... CUZ THE USED POWER FILLS THE CAP ...  THE KICKS ...  RAISE THE VOLTAGE IN THE CAP TO PUSH ..

IST

[TheNOP]

Just explained the setup to a friend and he said that it was not working like I think? He is an EE and was in the Air Force for 30 years. He basically said the JT is simply a transformer and that a DC - DC converter is far more efficient then a JT when converting to DC?

not quite true, it depend on what efficientcy he is talking about.
efficient at energy conversion or "efficient" in a way to say: you will have less problems at higher current with a DC - DC converter.

conventional DC - DC converters are far from having high conversion efficientcy, a bjt beat them at this.
but the same might not be true for jts with pickup coil(s).

Not sure about all that but I do trust him. He also said that I was not really charging the battery's at all? And that the voltage was empty?

Can anyone explain that?

he is right.
to charge a battery you actualy need to push charges(electrons imbalance) into it.

pulsing a battery will rise it voltage without adding much charges to it.

one thing i have learned about batteries is that:
you can have volts without apparent current and also can have current without apparent voltage.
when both are connected in series you will have an output that is not exactly what you would expect to measure.

the effect you are experiencing is due to the charges you put into the other battery, even if it is very little, and the properties of those chimical battery.
at relaxation time, a battery will regain a bit of it charge by itself.
this is due to the chimical reactions being slow to re-create electrons imbalance within the battery.

using batteries to test what you are testing is not a good idea, super cap would be better to test for OU.

i don't say that there is no usable effect with batteries.
but in a few weeks, if your system is not OU, you will notice that you will need to switch the batteries more and more often as the time pass.
with caps, you would see it way faster.

[jeanna]

Hi Jadaro,

I am sorry for that photo. It was an older one. I only posted it because it went along with the drawing, as I have given up getting much to post from the scope. I have a digital and it has macro, but the reflection on the scope is really hard to get around.

I wanted to respond to your suggestion to use higher voltage. Go ahead. There are a lot of folks, mostly sec makers like slayer, lidmotor kubikop and many others who start with 12 volts. They do great things.

What the 1.2 volt battery offers is the ability to notice when there are small losses. We can learn to be more precise because we must. If we are sloppy with any part we know it, but it could be missed with a 12 volt.
When the research is done, use the 12 volt... power your house, but you will be getting far more from the 12 volt battery because in your research you used a 1.2 volt battery.

That is my reason for keeping it small. (even though it can be frustrating at times.)

jeanna

[Pirate88179]

I'm trying to account for the reasoning behind using a low voltage source when it is actually the current which issues the voltage spike in the collapsing magnetic field.

It would make sense that the current coming from two 1.5 volt batteries in series would be different from that of two in parallel.

I've tried using two in series, parallel and alone.  The lone battery seems to function best.  I do not know why this is.  Has anyone got any thoughts?

Additionally, the 1.5 volt source is common but it is also unconventional in that is attempts to wow us with it's small stature but it's irrelevant when it comes to being implemented in say, a vehicle with a 12 volt source such as a motor-home.  Even most "green"-houses have 12 or 24 volt outlets.  Shouldn't we consider the possibility of using a different source voltage?

It would also be interesting to know what's going through your heads on the matter of cheer current available and current used. As some of you have pointed out, the transistor is often acting in tandem with inductances - switching on and off at resonance ( as determined by loads and circuit resistance ); since the current available is most high compared to that which is used, it seems reasonable to say that a car battery could be used to power a JTC given the right transistor.

Why not light up a 48 inch tube..and then post your youtube video using it for lighting.  ( that would be a nice trick you know! ..actually using the light for lighting )

Anyway, it would be nice to get 2 48 inch tubes lit like they are in any standard florescent ballast circuit.  Does anyone have any current usage characteristics on the florotubes?

The idea here is a matter of watts ..not necessarily voltage, but some of are trying to cover large distances with voltages.

@jeanna,  you must have a macro setting on you camera?  is it digital? ..can't you possibly get the pictures of your waveforms in focus?

I have videos of me lighting two 48" tubes from a single AA battery posted on Youtube.  Since I can light 1 from my Earth Battery, I am also going to try 2.  but, you said "lit like they are...." and mine, of course, are not as bright as the ones on the grid in a fixture.....not yet anyway.  Have you ever seen the ballasts they use on those?  Huge and very heavy and, I have no idea exactly what the amp draw is (we can google it) but I bet it is very high.  I am with you on this one.  My goal has been for a while:  To light the most I can using the least I can.


@ All:

A lot of very nice work being done here.  I have to go back and catch up but I scanned the latest posts and they show how much is happening here.  Great work everyone!!!!

Bill