PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Theory and Learning Center > Joule Thief Circuits > Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments?
2024-11-26, 17:35:08
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Author Topic: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments?  (Read 342792 times)
Topic Options img
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #325 on: 2011-01-21, 14:39:49 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011-01-21, 14:29:35
 It's possible that the potential induced across L1 itself is enough to cause the transistor to switch off, without pinching off the battery voltage.

MileHigh

Bingo!!!  ^-^
   
img  muDped
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #326 on: 2011-01-21, 19:05:29 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
For purposes of circuit performance comparison
may I suggest replacing the 1.0 Ohm resistor

(a)  with first a 0.10 Ohm for current monitoring,

then,

(b) with a 0.010 Ohm for current monitoring?

The scopes used have sufficiently high gain
to amplify the current waveform with precision.

Do you then observe any differences in the
efficiency, or other operation, of the circuit?



It is very interesting that the "non-ideal" method
of circuit construction seems to produce the most
beneficial result.

Could it be that "standard practices" for EMI/RFI
reduction are counterproductive (for OU considerations?)



---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  giantkiller
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #327 on: 2011-01-21, 19:29:45 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Did not Tesla show that Radiant Energy sinks to or absorbs into any metal in the surrounding environment?
Why let it go to waste? A diode becomes just a length of wire.

Quote from: Dumped on 2011-01-21, 19:05:29

It is very interesting that the "non-ideal" method
of circuit construction seems to produce the most
beneficial result.

Could it be that "standard practices" for EMI/RFI
reduction are counterproductive (for OU considerations?)





---------------------------
http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #328 on: 2011-01-21, 19:58:04 »
Group: Guest
Putting too low a current sensing resistor means that you have to turn up the gain to amplify the signal, but that also amplifies the noise.  There is a law of diminishing returns that eventually kicks in.

A suggestion for PhysicsProf:  It appears that you want to investigate how the circuit operates first.  There have been many ideas and suggestions for your consideration.  Pick a few main lines of investigation that interest you and no more than that.  Try to make the investigations relatively short endeavours.  Then reconfigure the sample device back to it's original configuration, the one that Lawrence sent to you.  Then test it for over unity using whatever strategy or strategies you deem appropriate and share the results.  The point is to not loose focus and complete the project within a reasonable amount of time.  Try to avoid the too many cooks syndrome.  There are no project managers on the over unity forums like there are in the real world and in an ideal forum world there would be.

MileHigh
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #329 on: 2011-01-21, 20:19:55 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: hartiberlin on 2011-01-21, 12:55:12
Hi Rosie,
I meant the ground current loops that might be flowing between your equipment, that is your scope
and your function generator.

These could induce also currents inside your circuit.
If you ever have seen the trouble musicians go through, when they have a live
Gig and all the amplifiers have a huge hum due to ground current loops
you will know, what I am speaking of.
The same can be true in your several equipment all grounded maybe to different
grid plugs getting ground current loops into your circuit.
Thus it is a must to measure this all floating from earth ground and
disconnect the earth ground from your scope ground and function generator
ground and tie together the scope and function generator ground at the same
location in your circuit.

I hope it gets clearer now.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,

IMHO ..... you should know there are differences in the type of electrical power supplied from Utilities to consumers around the World ( please find attachments ) which have characteristics and permanent installations that are "NOT" the same and must be treated that way. The only way to elevate any potential "ground loop" problems a Isolated grounding system must me invoked and permanently installed to all applicable electrical codes that may apply, this is the same system all reputable testing laboratories and facility's use to isolate the equipment ground to a clean electrical ground. The use of any equipment that has a grounded power outlet is for equipment and personal life protection and as a professional in the industry for over 30 years I would never recommend not to user this mandatory safety feature delegated from electrical installers, engineers and insurance company's around the globe to "INSURE" proper grounding.

As for Musicians and "ground loop" audio feed back in LIVE presentations 99% of the time are from the XLR 3-wire audio patch cord cables used between mixers, snakes and other audio equipment such as mixers, amplifiers and microphones seen first hand from my volunteer MCTV Staff experience recording several times at the famous Portland, Oregon "Waterfront Blues Festival" years ago ..... stomp and walk on XLR patch cord .... twirl a microphone by the XLR patch cord ...... drop a microphone stand on a patch cord ..... just to name a few things, none that are a permanent wiring system with equipment grounding protections in place. 

Regards,
Glen
   
img  muDped
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #330 on: 2011-01-21, 21:49:33 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011-01-21, 19:58:04
Putting too low a current sensing resistor means that you have to turn up the gain to amplify the signal, but that also amplifies the noise.  There is a law of diminishing returns that eventually kicks in.
...
MileHigh

There are cases where that is indeed a possibility.

Generally, reducing the resistance (or impedance)
of the current monitoring component will increase the
signal to noise ratio.

A lower resistance in the series switching circuit will
enable higher peak pulse current during transistor
"on" time.  At the low voltage of the circuit a One Ohm
series resistor represents a considerable power loss.

How advantageous a reduced series resistance may
(or may not) be would be revealed by circuit performance.

The reasoning for placing the resistor in the emitter circuit
is understandable;  however, the "degenerative feedback"
thus produced may alter switching characteristics (and
overall circuit performance) in some manner.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #331 on: 2011-01-21, 23:04:16 »
Group: Guest
All means of measuring current in a circuit leg will have some effect on circuit performance.  Even shuntless methods such as AC/DC current probes will raise the impedance of the leg where it is placed slightly.

The point being that if the shunt or current probe insertion impedance is small compared to other impedances in the measured leg, then its effects on the circuit will be small as well.  If too small a shunt value is used, I agree with MH that the signal will be so small as to get lost in the noise.

It's a matter of setting the shunt value to a small enough value to where it won't have more than a percent or two effect on the circuit performance.  Trying to make it much bigger or much smaller is asking for trouble either way.  So, in a way, I agree with your suggestions about experimenting with the shunt value.  But I also agree with MH's points on this matter.  Finding the best compromise is the correct "engineering solution".
« Last Edit: 2011-01-22, 00:09:00 by humbugger »
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #332 on: 2011-01-21, 23:37:09 »
Group: Guest
If the goal is to accurately measure input power to the circuit being tested (as opposed to observing instantaneous currents within the circuit), then I would use the method below.  For increased (theoretically perfect) accuracy, one just measures the voltage on C lowZ, which is the actual DC voltage going to the circuit. This compensates for the slight loss of battery voltage in the shunt.  

It seems like no one wants to directly measure the integrated DC input power but rather use a high-speed DSO and expensive probes to see the instantaneous currents and then try to multiply them with the battery voltage.  This approach, to me, is a whole lot of extra work annd is fraught with potential errors due to scope probing and math problems.  The method also eliminates the effects of battery impedance at high frequencies.

Just my two cents again  O0
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #333 on: 2011-01-22, 00:47:42 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: humbugger on 2011-01-21, 23:37:09
If the goal is to accurately measure input power to the circuit being tested (as opposed to observing instantaneous currents within the circuit), then I would use the method below.  For increased (theoretically perfect) accuracy, one just measures the voltage on C lowZ, which is the actual DC voltage going to the circuit. This compensates for the slight loss of battery voltage in the shunt.  

It seems like no one wants to directly measure the integrated DC input power but rather use a high-speed DSO and expensive probes to see the instantaneous currents and then try to multiply them with the battery voltage.  This approach, to me, is a whole lot of extra work annd is fraught with potential errors due to scope probing and math problems.  The method also eliminates the effects of battery impedance at high frequencies.

Just my two cents again  O0

This is an excellent suggestion, and is a variation of what ION showed the other day.  O0

Check your polarity of the averaging cap though, it is reversed.

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #334 on: 2011-01-22, 00:51:40 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
btw, I was hung out to dry by suggesting a similar method a year or so ago. Folks just won't believe that a simple DMM can provide an accurate DC average for AC signals. I proved it and showed it in 3 videos. The fact is, that it does a better job at averaging, then the scope could ever do.

Perhaps you've not seen the videos?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2KhGpmXPjc[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXTbcToC5T4[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70sPnpG2JO4[/youtube]

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #335 on: 2011-01-22, 00:54:19 »
Group: Guest
Humbugger:

I agree and that's a pretty nifty setup you have there for doing the filtering and measuring.  What makes sense to me is some form of low-pass filtering on the supply side to the DUT.  You really don't need anything too fancy there.  "Not too fancy" is not synonymous with inaccurate either.  The one caveat about the Joule Thief is that it may need a measurable output impedance from the source to support the oscillator, so you may need to add a series resistor.  You can't easily account for the power lost in that resistor but if you are allegedly in COP > 2 territory who really cares.

I think that there is an irrational "fear" about implementing an analog low-pass filtering measuring system for powering the DUT.  It is almost never done on the forums, almost like it is too "radical" a concept and there is a suspicion that it will "disturb" the "secret sauce."  I have made hundreds of suggestions like that until I was blue in the face and they almost never have been tried out.  That's somewhat ironic considering the people around here are supposed to be radical "outside of the box" free thinkers.  Needless to say we know one proponent of free energy that's convinced any type of low-pass filtering and measuring system will "ruin the oscillations."

On the separate secondary pick-up coil using the DSO measurement system makes perfect sense.  Or doing the measurements thermally is also very good.  If you make separate measurements with the two different systems and they correlate then it's excellent.

MileHigh
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #336 on: 2011-01-22, 01:01:16 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-01-22, 00:47:42
This is an excellent suggestion, and is a variation of what ION showed the other day.  O0

Check your polarity of the averaging cap though, it is reversed.

.99

I don't think so.  Think about it:  the minus side of the battery will be at a lower voltage than ground.  Only if net current were being pumped into the battery would my cap be upside down.   ???  Same thing I've been showing all along over in my Power Measurement thread.

Am I wrong?  Only for Rose's circuit, which puts a net charge into the battery while heating the load would the cap need reversing.   C.C


Same basic circuit (minus details) just drawn differently:
« Last Edit: 2011-01-22, 01:29:42 by humbugger »
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #337 on: 2011-01-22, 01:11:59 »
Group: Guest
Poynt gets some inverse Brownie Points!   ;D
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #338 on: 2011-01-22, 01:22:58 »
Group: Guest
It does seem backward at first glance.  I had to ponder it a minute myself!  It's easier to see if it's drawn with the shunt in line with the load instead of under the battery.  Same flow though!   O0

After watching Poynt's videos, I'd say he gets a net Big Gold Star (forget the inverse brownie point. it was a spurious transient lost in the noise).   ;D

I assume (it wasn't outright stated) that the DMMs were set to DC Volts.  They have internal integrator RC filters to limit noise.  Correct Poynt?

The big revelation here is that it's easier to fool a fancy scope (and the 784A is a beauty...I've owned several) with its internal math than it is to fool a good old simple RC integrator!  Especially with aperiodic or complex spikey waveforms.
« Last Edit: 2011-01-22, 02:15:26 by humbugger »
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #339 on: 2011-01-22, 02:18:35 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
You bet, DC Voltage setting.

Regarding that cap polarity...voltage drops are the same, so + to - in the battery, and + to - across the CSR. Therefore, the cap polarity is inverted.

;)

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #340 on: 2011-01-22, 02:21:45 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-01-22, 02:18:35
You bet, DC Voltage setting.

Regarding that cap polarity...voltage drops are the same, so + to - in the battery, and + to - across the CSR. Therefore, the cap polarity is inverted.

;)

.99

Do you insist?  Look carefully at the diagrams.  The bottom two are identical except for how they are drawn.  Are you hell-bent on getting that inverse brownie point?   :D
« Last Edit: 2011-01-22, 03:21:11 by humbugger »
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #341 on: 2011-01-22, 03:56:51 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
You are correct humbugger.  ;D

Apparently my mind was stuck on something else.  C.C

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #342 on: 2011-01-22, 04:40:15 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I trust I'm allowed to make the odd silly mistake ?  8)

Sorry for making you do all those diagrams, it's appreciated :)

I do like that input power measurement method though, but as MH mentioned, it's hard to convince even the so-called experts that it works well, or even at all!

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #343 on: 2011-01-22, 04:59:42 »
Group: Guest
You are allowed as many tiny nit-picking mistakes as you may make, sire!  As long as I'm allowed the tenacity to convince you of your error no matter what it takes.   :)

This was in the category of an optical illusion, basically.

Here's hoping you'll be there to correct me when I fail to see the finer points!  I truly enjoyed the calm, straightforward professionalism in your videos there.  Your methods, lab gear and bench practices appear to be immaculate as are your presentation skills.
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #344 on: 2011-01-22, 05:23:11 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
humbugger,

I appreciate both your tenacity and the compliments, thanks.

An illusion indeed! "ok now, free your mind, ...free your mind!"  8)

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #345 on: 2011-01-22, 10:50:06 »
Group: Guest
By the way, Poynt, we (apparently all males, but she specifically mentions you and I and MileHigh) have been publicly accused of being ignorant sexist chauvinist pigs today in Rosemary Ainslee's blog here:

http://www.newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/

"Humbugger (TK's new (and much needed) forum identity) can advise all and sundry that we may ignore the effect of a junction on a 'line' when making a voltage measurement."

She is saying that I am Tinsel Koala and he is me, which is true only in her paranoid imagination.  Quite laughable if it were not so sad.

These accusations are unfounded and slanderous to us as people and to this forum.  I consider these irresponsible statements to be quite offensive.  She is trying to come off as a martyr to the "old boys club", it seems.  I guess it's easier for her to do this than to work on her "invention" or learn at least the proper semantics for technical discussions (if not the physics and electronics).

This is not a "call for banning" on my part; only a heads up in case you were unaware that she tippy-toes away from here and splatters falsehoods and ugly reports about members here on her public blog.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #346 on: 2011-01-22, 14:32:00 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
 Yesterday, 1-21-11, my friend at the university and I put in a couple of hours doing measurements/tests of Lawrence Tseung's device, using Prototype A which he sent me.
Our principal measurement tool was a Tektronix 3032B scope, 300 MHz.
 The university is approx 70 miles from my home (we have moved since I taught and did research there), and the scope is his -- so I cannot easily do the tests I'm sure you will request...  I can do a more tests over time, yes -- but if you want certain tests done, I might suggest you get started on your own DUT!

The set-up has been shown previously -- here I display a photo with labels provided by Lawrence for convenience in the discussion. 
During data taking on 1-21-11, we removed the 10 ohm resistor much of the time, using only the 100 ohm resistor.  And then at times, for another measure, we replaced this 100 ohm resistor with a 1 ohm resistor (so that the voltage drop across the one ohm gives the current directly).  I will let you know which output resistor is being used.

   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #347 on: 2011-01-22, 14:44:48 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
   We used the math function on the Tek 3032 to calculate power, following the instructions from the manual as recommended by .99 -- see the manual page below.

   In the waveforms which will be shown, channel 1 will be Voltage In (i.e., across the 1.5V AA battery, points 1 and 2)  OR -- when we move the 2 probes to the output circuit -- Voltage Out (taken between points labeled a and b).  Input current is measured by measuring the voltage drop across the input 1 ohm resistor, points 2 and 3.
Output current is measured across the output resistor (connected in series to the output LED), points b and c -- note again that we just used one output resistor at a time, not two as shown in the photo.
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #348 on: 2011-01-22, 14:49:24 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote
ignorant sexist chauvinist pigs

humbugger,

I was made aware of her latest entry, but thanks again for the headsup. She didn't quite use all those adjectives, but the message is basically the same, I agree.

I am not too concerned about her rant at this point, as it's quite tame relative to the formidable wrath of Rose that she is capable of unleashing. And she is entitled to her opinion, even though it is borne of frustration.

She claims to have "deregistered" herself, but it's not so.

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #349 on: 2011-01-22, 14:57:51 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-01-22, 14:44:48
  We used the math function on the Tek 3032 to calculate power, following the instructions from the manual as recommended by .99 -- see the manual page below.

   In the waveforms which will be shown, channel 1 will be Voltage In (i.e., across the 1.5V AA battery, points 1 and 2)  OR -- when we move the 2 probes to the output circuit -- Voltage Out (taken between points labeled a and b).  Input current is measured by measuring the voltage drop across the input 1 ohm resistor, points 2 and 3.
Output current is measured across the output resistor (connected in series to the output LED), points b and c -- note again that we just used one output resistor at a time, not two as shown in the photo.

Professor,

This may seem illogical, but I can assure you that it could have a significant effect on your measurements.

Rather than measure the battery voltage at points 1 and 2, please solder (if possible) a 1 inch (or less) wire to the battery holder terminals directly and use those for the scope connections instead. This is called a "Kelvin" measurement method, and mitigates the effect of high transient currents flowing through the measurement wire. What we aim to measure is the battery voltage directly, not the battery voltage on the other side of a current-carrying inductance.

Make sense?

.99


---------------------------
"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
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 17:35:08