Joule Thief 101

[tinman]

Here ya go MH--
Grab ya popcorn.
Just like gaining the maximum amplitude in the wine glass
Welcome to the world of resonance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wD6aDzEVdQ


Brad

[MileHigh]

Brad:

You are back into your zone I see.  Let's see you be a man and comment on the red dots.

Says he who dose no experiments at all.

If I did experiments I would spin circles around you.

Your quote above is a non-responsive answer to my statement, "Without a controlled experiment that statement is meaningless."

When you are in a squeeze you make a non-responsive answer.  You did not perform any kind of serious experiment at all.  All that you did is throw up some anecdotal scope captures that amount to no more than garbage-in-garbage-out and clearly your statements are garbage without any substance behind them.

Like i said,you dont understand how the JT circuit work's,and yet here you are trying to tell us all about it.

That is just more BS propagandizing.  Early on in the thread you were making mistake after mistake and I called you on it.  You are not used to that, you are used to being comfortably numb and having your own way with the the bobbing ducks in bondage looking at you do "Brad flavour" electronics.  So you have been attempting over and over to make the "you don't understand" pitch about me.  All that you do when you propagandize like that that is make yourself look like a disingenuous fool that is as fake-ass as a three dollar bill.

I am not perfect and when I make mistakes I admit them.  Meanwhile your brain is frying as we speak over the red dots.

I will repeat:  It pays to think before you just hook up the two circuits to your scope and declare victory.  No controlled experiment putting the two circuits on an equal playing field, then you can't say anything.  Garbage in - garbage out.

If the first circuit was using the battery i stated above,then it will include the resistive losses of the battery during the off time,where that resistance is 5.7 ohm's. This value increases as the voltage gets lower in the battery,so the first circuit will become less efficient as it drains the battery.

The second circuit excludes this loss.

No the second circuit doesn't really exclude this loss because like I clearly explained, if you are going to have the same energy in the LED pulse, then by definition the second circuit has to put more energy into the L1 coil as compared to the fist circuit.  The second circuit will also have increasing battery losses as the battery internal impedance increases.

Believe me, it can get very frustrating to state things and have them disappear down the drain into your huge mental blind spot.  It happens all the time.  You know, the "It passed right through Brad like he wasn't even there" phenomenon.

Now,can you work out why we only have 24mA peak current,with 1volt across a coil that has less than .053 ohms of resistance?
Why dose the transistor switch of before we get anywhere near peak current?

Because the switching is based on approaching a time constant that is based on L/R-effective.  The resistance of the wire may or may not play a part in R-effective.  It all depends on the build of the Joule Thief.

I base all my findings on experiment's,where you have admitted to basing your claims on assumption's.

Most of your experiments, after six years of working on the bench, are amateurish without ever doing any kind of a serious organized measurement regimen.  They are typically half a step above the absolute beginner that does his very first SSG build.  Your presentation skills are almost non-existent.  If you want more credibility with your experiments, then earn it.  The assumptions that I made about the efficiency for the two circuits are reasonable and logical and set up the framework for actually doing a serious experiment.  On the other hand your "comparison and conclusion" for the two circuits as you presented it is junk.

How the hell have you made it this far MH,when you post garbage like you have above.
I cannot believe you have been arguing with myself and Mag's (who do experiment,and base there findings around those experiments),and making  claims

Keep pushing that propaganda Big Brother.

MileHigh

[tinman]

Brad:

You are back into your zone I see.  Let's see you be a man and comment on the red dots.

If I did experiments I would spin circles around you.

Your quote above is a non-responsive answer to my statement, "Without a controlled experiment that statement is meaningless."

When you are in a squeeze you make a non-responsive answer.  You did not perform any kind of serious experiment at all.  All that you did is throw up some anecdotal scope captures that amount to no more than garbage-in-garbage-out and clearly your statements are garbage without any substance behind them.

That is just more BS propagandizing.  Early on in the thread you were making mistake after mistake and I called you on it.  You are not used to that, you are used to being comfortably numb and having your own way with the the bobbing ducks in bondage looking at you do "Brad flavour" electronics.  So you have been attempting over and over to make the "you don't understand" pitch about me.  All that you do when you propagandize like that that is make yourself look like a disingenuous fool that is as fake-ass as a three dollar bill.

I am not perfect and when I make mistakes I admit them.  Meanwhile your brain is frying as we speak over the red dots.

I will repeat:  It pays to think before you just hook up the two circuits to your scope and declare victory.  No controlled experiment putting the two circuits on an equal playing field, then you can't say anything.  Garbage in - garbage out.

No the second circuit doesn't really exclude this loss because like I clearly explained, if you are going to have the same energy in the LED pulse, then by definition the second circuit has to put more energy into the L1 coil as compared to the fist circuit.  The second circuit will also have increasing battery losses as the battery internal impedance increases.

Believe me, it can get very frustrating to state things and have them disappear down the drain into your huge mental blind spot.  It happens all the time.  You know, the "It passed right through Brad like he wasn't even there" phenomenon.

Because the switching is based on approaching a time constant that is based on L/R-effective.  The resistance of the wire may or may not play a part in R-effective.  It all depends on the build of the Joule Thief.

Most of your experiments, after six years of working on the bench, are amateurish without ever doing any kind of a serious organized measurement regimen.  They are typically half a step above the absolute beginner that does his very first SSG build.  Your presentation skills are almost non-existent.  If you want more credibility with your experiments, then earn it.  The assumptions that I made about the efficiency for the two circuits are reasonable and logical and set up the framework for actually doing a serious experiment.  On the other hand your "comparison and conclusion" for the two circuits as you presented it is junk.

Keep pushing that propaganda Big Brother.

MileHigh

Sorry MH,but i will no longer be paying any attention to some one that has admitted to making claims based around assumption's.
You overlooking the resistive losses in the battery is a big mistake,and so your claim that the first circuit is more efficient,has just been proven wrong--beyond doubt. At 1.1 volt's,you already have losses over a 5 ohm resistance,and this loss is not present in the second circuit. The second circuit eliminates all those losses(including the extra wiring to the battery),and the only small losses are in the L1 coil itself,which the first circuit also see's.

You dont stop and think,you dont experiment,and your claims are based around assumptions-which you admitted to,while my claims are based around experiments,and the ability to see all the losses in the circuit--like the batteries internal resistance that you failed to take into account.

The second circuit is far more efficient,and that is a fact,and one you cannot refute on claims based around assumptions.


Brad

[MileHigh]

Ha ha ha... The drama queen is making yet another hasty exit, and he is apparently still not processing information properly and he can't cope with the fact that the comparison he did between the two circuits was not a controlled experiment and is pure junk.

Plus you are haunted by the red dots.  What do you get when an unstoppable fact meets an immovable intellect?

Answer:  The infallible Dr. Brainfry.

[tinman]

Ha ha ha... The drama queen is making yet another hasty exit, and he is apparently still not processing information properly and he can't cope with the fact that the comparison he did between the two circuits was not a controlled experiment and is pure junk.

Plus you are haunted by the red dots.  What do you get when an unstoppable fact meets an immovable intellect?

Answer:  The infallible Dr. Brainfry.

Come on MH,you can do better than that--i havnt even worked up a sweat yet.

Your insults are about as good as your claimed assumptions

I dont know why,but i picture you as being like the guy in the video below.
That old fella made an assumption as well,but it wasnt a bottle of booze after all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSr0l5sljOs


Brad