PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-27, 22:52:20
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Lasersaber's Jouleringer  (Read 23896 times)
Group: Guest
I was rather impressed by the action of this simple cct in this Lasersaber Youtube vid and thought it might be of interest to some of you boys. Of particular interest is just how long this cct oscillates after the batteries are removed, and the results of the parallel cap bank.

Thought it might have some relevance to the Janost's selfrunner, but did not want to contaminate that thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoEXCweMxhk&feature=relmfu



   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Good call Farrah!  "Bird's nest" wiring technique, although it looks messy,
can be very mysteriously efficient in certain applications.

LaserSaber said in the video that he'd clean it up in an effort to make it
even more efficient but I always wonder whether that ever makes any
difference or improvement.  Sometimes lots of distributed inductance
and capacitance can give it just the touch it needs...

Aye, this one certainly bears a closer look at.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
Here is his cleaned up version, one of them anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbLQATOjZhE&feature=channel&list=UL

He has made many improvements to this device.  This is a very interesting cct and I have replicated it and it works.  One of the interesting things that I observed in my replication was that the frequency of it, as seen on my scope, would always be in a run a way mode.  The frequency would keep increasing until it took itself out of resonance and then it quickly faded out.  I was unable to stabilize the run a way frequency, but wondered what would happen if I did stabilize it.....

P.S. This is his old stuff!
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
Hello,

Lasersaber has done it again and has updated his crt to a 3.0 version. 

Here is the link

http://www.laserhacker.com/SuperJouleRinger3.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcFHZMhnV2g

And here is my failed attempt to replicate, maybe some can help!   ???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7EdlzlZoJU&feature=plcp
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
In your video you said that the secondary winding was
16 Gauge wire and that the primary was 28 Gauge wire.

You may have the windings connected in reverse:  the
primary winding should be the heavier wire (fewer turns)
and the secondary should be the smaller wire (more
turns.)

Also, it is unclear in the video how your neon lamp load
is connected.  Whatever load is in series with the secondary
winding to feed the base of the transistor must be
electrically conductive at a fairly low voltage to enable
startup base current.





---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
Hello Dumped,

So regardless of what I said in the video, I have a first winding of 28 gauge around the ferrite rod core.  I the wound a second winding of 16 gauge on top of that.  The hook up of the wires is the same as presented.  I'm not sure why I am not getting the effect.  I wish LS would post some values or a scope shot!
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
P.S.

I also tried various other setup's to try to achieve the effect with no results.  My video shows my menial success, which can light an LED but killed it in about 10 seconds.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Could it be that your power source (the two
series connected 9 Volt batteries) is too weak?

The circuit should operate at down to about
1 Volt - have you tried other cells/batteries?


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
   I've replicated Lasersaber's 3.0, based on an operating 2.0 version that I had previously.  Then, I simply took the output wire that was connected to the emitter on the 2N3055 (2.0 version) and moved it to the collector. (Other than the coil, that's the major change between 2.0 and 3.0 as I see it.) 
    It worked great!   Thanks, LS.

    I then ran with 6 LED bulbs in my light-box, as I had done with the 2.0.  I found that the light output was about the same for the two versions (109 Lm/W for the 3.0 versus 112 Lm/W for the older 2.0 -- at 12.8V input).

    Next, I hooked up the output to my "Davey-bell" system and observed a LOT of electrolysis;  but no xs heat.  (I've pointed out elsewhere how I see many similarities between so-called "cold-fusion" experiments which I've done for many years and the Davey invention patented in 1944 by Peter Davey.  Both have electrodes and electrolysis; both claim "excess (xs) heat" under certain circumstances.  )

 I made a quick vid of this effort today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DtvKnZk9iM&feature=youtu.be  

« Last Edit: 2012-09-30, 02:40:55 by PhysicsProf »
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
Could it be that your power source (the two
series connected 9 Volt batteries) is too weak?

The circuit should operate at down to about
1 Volt - have you tried other cells/batteries?

They are pretty old I will have to check.  I also realized that i actually used 26 guage mag wire as opposed to the recommended 28.  I'm not sure how much of a difference this would make though.
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
  I've replicated Lasersaber's 3.0, based on an operating 2.0 version that I had previously.  Then, I simply took the output wire that was connected to the emitter on the 2N3055 (2.0 version) and moved it to the collector. (Other than the coil, that's the major change between 2.0 and 3.0 as I see it.) 
    It worked great!   Thanks, LS.

    I then ran with 6 LED bulbs in my light-box, as I had done with the 2.0.  I found that the light output was about the same for the two versions (109 Lm/W for the 3.0 versus 112 Lm/W for the older 2.0 -- at 12.8V input).

    Next, I hooked up the output to my "Davey-bell" system and observed a LOT of electrolysis;  but no xs heat.  (I've pointed out elsewhere how I see many similarities between so-called "cold-fusion" experiments which I've done for many years and the Davey invention patented in 1944 by Peter Davey.  Both have electrodes and electrolysis; both claim "excess (xs) heat" under certain circumstances.  )

 I made a quick vid of this effort today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DtvKnZk9iM&feature=youtu.be  



Those are great results...congrats
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Stprue:

Try reversing one of the windings (switch the wires on one winding only), sounds like you are not getting the right direction of feedback and your circuit is oscillating at some much higher frequency where the phase shift from the distributed capacitance of the windings inverts the feedback polarity.

Also depending on the primary current, the gain could be as low as 5. Lasersaber may have a 2n3055 device that has a higher gain (they do vary from different manufacturers.)

In looking closely at Lasersabers device and the data sheet for a 2n3055, it requires a robust device such as the 2n3055 since all of the load current passes through the B-E junction. In the case of the 2n3055 it is allowed maximum of 7 amps and will drop up to 1.3 volts in that junction.

The use of an open ended core such as a ferrite rod means you need more turns to get the same inductance you could get with fewer turns and a gapped inductor. This means you need to use heavier gauge wire if you are to have an equivalent ohmic loss over a gapped ferrite.

What Lasesaber does not show is the power drain from the battery. Circuits should be evaluated from the standpoint of efficiency. If we are not considering efficiency many things are possible.

Other than that, the circuit is indeed novel.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Full Member
***

Posts: 209
@ION

Thanks for the info, this all makes sense and will give me something to look into.  I was also wondering about the draw of his crt.  it may not be much better then an inverter but how knows.  I guess we will have to wait and see.

Thanks again.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
@ION

Thanks for the info, this all makes sense and will give me something to look into.  I was also wondering about the draw of his crt.  it may not be much better then an inverter but how knows.  I guess we will have to wait and see.

Thanks again.

For a better understanding read reply #1 here:

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=602.0


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
From my own tests made two years ago, using a single MOSFET transistor controlled by a generator, I could recover near 95% of the back emf, in the best cases. I suppose that we can recover a bit less with the jouleringer due to the efficiency of the oscillator but more than 80% should be surely obtainable.
Nevertheless if we connect directly the electrolytic capacitors to the load, we can get 100% efficiency, which is better.  ;)

   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
From my own tests made two years ago, using a single MOSFET transistor controlled by a generator, I could recover near 95% of the back emf, in the best cases. I suppose that we can recover a bit less with the jouleringer due to the efficiency of the oscillator but more than 80% should be surely obtainable.
Nevertheless if we connect directly the electrolytic capacitors to the load, we can get 100% efficiency, which is better.  ;)

Agreed, the blocking oscillator is best used to provide a better  impedance match between source and load when there exists an otherwise severe mismatch.

Other than that, best to connect the load directly to the battery.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
...
the blocking oscillator is best used to provide a better  impedance match between source and load when there exists an otherwise severe mismatch.
...

I agree 100%. I wonder why some people see a way for overunity in a setup that so many electronics amateurs played with, from the 70's, without having seen the least anomaly.

   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
I agree 100%. I wonder why some people see a way for overunity in a setup that so many electronics amateurs played with, from the 70's, without having seen the least anomaly.

Actually the blocking oscillator goes back probably to the 20's or earlier and was accomplished with vacuum tubes.

My first was built in the mid 50's using transistor CK722 when they first became available to hobbyists for less than a dollar.

It was used to illuminate a four foot fluorescent tube  held in the hand as we walked the streets as part of a halloween prank.

Maybe this was the first actual lasersaber.

It is always interesting and often humorous to watch persons completely unskilled in switchmode designs attempting to build these things.

Sometimes they get lucky and even a blind dog occasionally finds a bone.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. LOL

I have always been an electronics amateur at heart. (one who loves what they do) and also an engineering professional that was paid  $$$$ for a more rigorous skillset, but essentially doing what I love.

A blocking oscillator can be a simple tool to act as a catalyst for some other process. In itself, and with traditional materials it will not yield OU. Most folks that play with these things never make accurate input / output power measurements and as a result believe they have discovered something new. They have not.

In essence, a blocking oscillator turns a voltage source e.g. a 1.5 volt battery into a current source.

As a current source it can illuminate strings of LED's far in excess of the battery terminal voltage (which to the uninitiated seems to be a miracle), but the power is always accounted for. Power in = Power out - losses.

Lasersaber never does a careful accounting of power. His videos resemble a magician doing tricks, not an engineering assessment of the circuits merits, because he has a fundamental lack of knowledge regarding power magnetics design.

Tektronix uses blocking oscillators which are rigorously and robustly designed as part of the HV generation circuits in some of their older oscilloscopes.

I am willing to discuss the merit and downsideof Lasersabers latest circuit if anyone is interested. It does show some accidental novelty.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Ion
Quote
It is always interesting and often humorous to watch persons completely unskilled in switchmode designs attempting to build these things.


I would agree it can be interesting especially when someone unskilled in the art does something nobody could ever have predicted that just blows you away, such is the art of creativity which may supercede skill in many respects.

Quote
Lasersaber never does a careful accounting of power. His videos resemble a magician doing tricks, not an engineering assessment of the circuits merits, because he has a fundamental lack of knowledge regarding power magnetics design.

It would seem to me his fundamental lack of knowledge has not hindered his success very much which in the end may be all that matters. In fact if you look back through history much of our science could be considered as blind luck or "accidental science", that is when someone does something wrong or by accident then say's "well that's odd" at the result.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
@Ion

I would agree it can be interesting especially when someone unskilled in the art does something nobody could ever have predicted that just blows you away, such is the art of creativity which may supercede skill in many respects.
Please specify exactly what work of Lasersaber's has "blown you away"?

Quote
It would seem to me his fundamental lack of knowledge has not hindered his success very much...
Please specify exactly what this "success" is that you are referring to.

And in the future AC, refrain from making blanket unsubstantiated statements such as those you made above, it's rather offensive.


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Poynt99
Quote
Please specify exactly what work of Lasersaber's has "blown you away"?
Well I found his video's running banks of LED's off a few small caps very interesting considering I have worked with similar caps since I could damn near walk, I figure 35+ years. I understand all about Energy and Power and Voltage so we don't have to go there, I just found it very interesting that with all the LED's and balls of wire and coils and DIY transformers and poor transistors he still managed to produce what is obviously a high efficiency circuit. You see I don't need a $10K oscilloscope to tell me this because I know exactly how much energy his capacitors can store from experience based on the rating which he discloses. In a world where average efficiency, which I know from real world testing, is lucky to break 60% I found his work refreshing.

Quote
Please specify exactly what this "success" is that you are referring to.
His success in producing what are obviously some very high efficiency circuits, I think any fool can build a high power circuit but show me a person who can build a very high efficiency circuit and they will have my attention.

Quote
And in the future AC, refrain from making blanket unsubstantiated statements such as those you made above, it's rather offensive.

I don't believe I made any unsubstantiated statements, I basically said it was interesting that despite what appears to be a lack of experience by Lasersaber he has found success in building some very neat and efficient circuits. I may be wrong but I think people find it offensive because they think I am criticizing a person who considers themselves to be an expert. I have 30+ years experience in electronics, computer science, applied mechanics etc... and have worked in power stations over 260MW as a Power Engineer so I think I have earned the right to criticize any "Expert" I please.
What I find offensive is when people believe experts are not to be questioned nor criticized, I will decide who is an expert and who is not for myself.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
History is rife with accidental solutions. More so than intentional efforts.
While many a knowledged person struggles with the problem, the successor defies the obstacle.
Unintentional corrections seems to be the law of of the land.

Oh S)omething H)appens I)n T)ime is inescapable.


---------------------------
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@GK
Quote
History is rife with accidental solutions. More so than intentional efforts.
I see this moreso than most because I find history fascinating, not so much popular opinions which are usually misguided but real history documented by credible sources. For instance all this relatively recent hubub about Sonoluminescence which was accidentally discovered tens of years prior by some french men I believe who were trying to stir their developing solution with ultrasonic waves. Then Lo and Behold these odd white dots started appearing on their photographic paper and Sonoluminescence was born .... then forgotten. Then some people stumble onto their documentation and say " that's odd" and Sonoluminescence is reborn and hits the headlines as a new discovery which is really an old accidental discovery. History and science can be funny that way :D.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I don't believe I made any unsubstantiated statements,
Actually, you do quite often; it's your MO.

Quote
I have 30+ years experience in electronics, computer science, applied mechanics etc... and have worked in power stations over 260MW as a Power Engineer so I think I have earned the right to criticize any "Expert" I please.
So you say, but you've actually shown sweet bugger all to that effect. You've never shown any of your so-called work because according to you, we're all not worthy of it as I recall you saying. Gimme a break man.  C.C Why are you here then, just to criticize?

Quote
What I find offensive is when people believe experts are not to be questioned nor criticized, I will decide who is an expert and who is not for myself.
Question all you like, but have something more to back up your assertions than just what amounts to hearsay. ION IS an expert, that is clear. But so far all I've seen from your end is armchair criticism and philosophical babble. I find it especially offensive when you try to argue in areas where clearly you have no experience.


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Poynt99
Quote
Actually, you do quite often; it's your MO.

I didn't know I had an MO, lol, I like that..... MO, I think your right.

Quote
So you say, but you've actually shown sweet bugger all to that effect. You've never shown any of your so-called work because according to you, we're all not worthy of it as I recall you saying. Gimme a break man.   Why are you here then, just to criticize?

Not worthy?, I don't think I would ever say anything to that effect because you and everyone else are the reason I am here. At best I try to add balance and when the critics start bashing people I criticize them which I don't imagine they like very much.

Quote
Question all you like, but have something more to back up your assertions than just what amounts to hearsay. ION IS an expert, that is clear. But so far all I've seen from your end is armchair criticism and philosophical babble. I find it especially offensive when you try to argue in areas where clearly you have no experience.

I think argue is a strong word and would rather call it debate, debating the topic by offering counterpoints which even I may not agree with but they are a counterpoint none the less. The problem comes about when people believe there should be no debate because they think they are certain of the answer which is simply an opinion. Or that debate requires knowledge of the topic at hand which is false because we can simply offer counterpoints in the form of questions towards the person we are debating a topic with. You see real debate does not require that I know or have experience of anything concerning the topic nor that I be right about anything only that I offer a counterpoint..... it is healthy debate nothing more nothing less in my opinion.

What I have found truely bizarre is the fact that some people do find "debate" offensive or off limits, can you imagine such a thing?. That we shouldn't talk about a subject, that a subject is somehow taboo or that we are in some way incapable of considering it?. Who in the hell do they think they are that they should decide what people can talk about and what they cannot, that is truely offensive in every sense of the word in my opinion.

For the record .... we are debating right now ;)

AC
« Last Edit: 2012-10-07, 07:00:13 by allcanadian »


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-27, 22:52:20