Joule Thief 101

[MileHigh]

Brad:

Because MH,the pot was turned right down to it's lowest resistance,so it would make no difference to which side the scope probe was on.

Great, so you hacked the Joule Thief to get it to run at even lower voltages.  So you pull a bait and switch for the 100th time to force a square peg into a round hole to make your "point."

You are like some combination of a bull in a china shop and a "stream of consciousness" experimenter where everything is fluid and things change back and forth and you jump in and out of different ideas and statements and ultimately leave a jumbled mess of a trail of discongruent ideas that all add up to a convoluted mess but in your head it's all normal and "other people are the ones that have the problem."

You are not talking about one Joule Thief circuit, you are talking about five different Joule Thief circuits at the same time.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Brad:

More rubbish  MH-->what do you think a JT circuit is designed to do-->thats right,run at low voltages,and be able to light an LED. We are looking at the operation of the JT circuit running at the voltages we want them to run at-->not MH's fully charged battery voltage.

We are back to where you agreed to do what I requested of you:  Describe how a standard Joule Thief circuit works.  Standard Joule Thief, standard circuit, standard running voltage, no bait and switch, no stream of consciousness.  Keep your mind focused on a single task.

Now are you capable of doing that or not?

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Brad:

Here, I undertook to do a fairly complete annotation of Magluvin's scope capture that I requested.  That is an example of the WORK and the thinking and analyzing that is REQUIRED if you are going to understand how a circuit works.

Now, when you look at Magluvin's scope capture for the "rundown to 360 mv" capture, the full compliment of WORK has to be done to understand it.  I am assuming that he did not change the circuit when he took that capture.  He simply observed how the Joule Thief switched over to a completely different operating mode at the lower voltage.  I have not analyzed that and I have no intention of analyzing it.

The reason I am emphasizing the "WORK" angle is because this was your "explanation" for how your "Cool Joule" feedback oscillator circuit worked:  "Miller effect."

Your explanation for your "Cool Joule" circuit's operation is a joke.

Now, if you want to describe how a standard Joule Thief circuit works I am all ears.

MileHigh

[sm0ky2]

Why should an experimenter have to "hunt" for resonance and find some "special delicate balance" if you have been pitching it all this time?  If I strike a bell it resonates.  What kind of "special" or "remarkable" results should Magluvin and others get if they "strike resonance?"  What are they supposed to see?

"why" is more of a philosophical question. I could blame it on some not willing to read what was presented to them, others on their lack of equipment, while others still, because they missed some pertinent piece of information or data that induces unknown factors into their circuit. I did my best to describe each of these details from my own perspective, as well as from (my interpretation of) others perspectives whom also understand these principals, as have been presented.

Consider this:  Place a clamp + weight onto one side of your bell. Notice how this changes the resonance.
The waveform is destroyed.
you might only get a plink, or a ding.

Now, place other weights clamped to other places around the bell, and notice how this changes, not only the resonant frequency of the bell, but its ability to resonate.

If Magluvin or anyone else succeeds in achieving something remarkable with a Joule Thief in "resonance" and explains what is actually taking place instead of just observing something, I will be happy to admit that I was wrong and acknowledge that something special is taking place due to the resonance.

On the other hand, if all that Magluvin or others can get is mushy wobbly scope traces that are difficult to explain and don't clearly show "resonance" and yield unremarkable power-in to LED-illumination-out results (or any other metric you want to define), what are YOU going to do?

MileHigh

I, unlike you, do not depend on the ability of others to succeed or fail in particular experiments, to formulate an already proven theory.
especially when the parameters of any single experiment have not even been defined.

what I will do, is offer the best help I can to walk them through making their particular JT, better.
locating and reducing the destructive interference in the system,
bringing resonances in the circuit closer to "in phase", so as to aid in constructive interference.

What I have a hard time understanding, MH:
is why you are so adamantly against such attempts to improve efficiency in this manner.
this is not a matter of me "proving" anything to you, this was proven 200 ago.
when it comes down to it, this is simple signal processing....

[sm0ky2]

  I have not analyzed that and I have no intention of analyzing it.

MileHigh

yes, this seems to be your general viewpoint here.

Do you even "own" a Joule thief?