Big Joule Theif

[sucahyo]

No, unless the supply DC voltage was higher than the charging battery terminal voltage plus about 0.6V for the forward voltage drop of the charging diode at any particular point in time.

Hoppy

I see. So that is the reason to use twice source voltage for charged battery.


I think Joule thief would be more efficient if we use source positive as return path. Not 0V ground like many has use.

[Hoppy]

Wouldn't the battery keep charging even if we turned off/remove the transistor?

No, unless the supply DC voltage was higher than the charging battery terminal voltage plus about 0.6V for the forward voltage drop of the charging diode at any particular point in time.

Hoppy

[Hoppy]

I apologise to slayer007 and others for appearing to move off topic talking about Bedini charging but I see the Joule Thief as much the same device (a reactive energy charger). Most of my experimentation is with solid state Bedini type chargers / energisers and I found this thread interesting insofar as it is discussing increasing the size and power of the basic Joule Thief.

Hoppy

[sucahyo]

Hi sucahyo

There is nothing normal or conventional about charging with a return to
0V ground. This method does not use DC current form the supply unless the system is set up wrong. Both methods will result in high voltage radiant energy entering the charging battery when the power coil discharges.

Hoppy

Wouldn't the battery keep charging even if we turned off/remove the transistor?

[Hoppy]

Interesting info. But won't utilizing negative terminal means charging it with induction plus normal electricity?

I think by utilizing 0V return you are doing normal trickle charge which can be verified by charging the battery normally. From Tesla switch document I read that a radiantly charged battery will take very long time of charge on ordinary charger before it will start charging. If your battery charge right away on ordinary charger, it would meant that you are not radiant charging it.

Hi sucahyo

There is nothing normal or conventional about charging with a return to
0V ground. This method does not use DC current form the supply unless the system is set up wrong. Both methods will result in high voltage radiant energy entering the charging battery when the power coil discharges.

Hoppy

[Hoppy]

Hi Hoppy.

I just tried the 0v return on my SG. Wheel speed is reduced, but charging seems ALOT faster. Primary input is higher though, which would account for the faster charging. Have you done extended tests with this method to see if the charge holds? JB has talked a bit about not grounding all parts of the circuit, seems to me by grounding the charging battery you lose some of the benefits.
Regards/

ren

Hi ren

Returning the charging battery to the 0V rail kills a lot of the radiant but I find that it does give a faster deeper charge because. However, its important to keep the supply voltage lower than the charge battery voltage otherwise a direct DC charging path exists through the diode in the charging path.

Neither method of charging 'holds' and I have found over the two years I have been building and experimenting, that batteries need to be regularly cycled and periodically re-conditioned with an energiser. The sulfation process starts almost immediately a battery is left to stand irrespective of which method is used to charge it. Unless a LA battery is left permanently on an energiser which is not very practical in a lot of applications, it will deteriorate and loose capacity fairly quickly, especially if not used regularly.

Hoppy

[sucahyo]

Battery charging and battery conditioning (energising) are different things and require different waveforms. A high frequency, high radiant content waveform will also charge a battery but not as efficiently as a , low radiant, low frequency pulsed waveform. Also, try connecting the charging battery neg terminal to 0V ground instead of the pos supply rail as is the convention with Bedini energisers. I find battery charging is more efficient with a 0V return and conditioning best with a return to the pos supply rail.

Interesting info. But won't utilizing negative terminal means charging it with induction plus normal electricity?

I think by utilizing 0V return you are doing normal trickle charge which can be verified by charging the battery normally. From Tesla switch document I read that a radiantly charged battery will take very long time of charge on ordinary charger before it will start charging. If your battery charge right away on ordinary charger, it would meant that you are not radiant charging it.

[slayer007]

If your going to make a joule thief make sure you use a toroid with a ferrite core NOT the powdered iron ones.

The iron ones will work as a joule thief but not as good.
I just made a big one with a three inch iron core it was a yellow and white toroid.
And I can't get any voltage out of my secondary winding.
I can get a little voltage on the BEMF of the JT but not as near as much as if I would have used a ferrite toroid core.

And as for the charge negative going to source negative thats the way I like to do it to.

[ren]

Battery charging and battery conditioning (energising) are different things and require different waveforms. A high frequency, high radiant content waveform will also charge a battery but not as efficiently as a , low radiant, low frequency pulsed waveform. Also, try connecting the charging battery neg terminal to 0V ground instead of the pos supply rail as is the convention with Bedini energisers. I find battery charging is more efficient with a 0V return and conditioning best with a return to the pos supply rail.

Hoppy

Hi Hoppy.

I just tried the 0v return on my SG. Wheel speed is reduced, but charging seems ALOT faster. Primary input is higher though, which would account for the faster charging. Have you done extended tests with this method to see if the charge holds? JB has talked a bit about not grounding all parts of the circuit, seems to me by grounding the charging battery you lose some of the benefits.
Regards/

ren

[Hoppy]

So, we do distinguish two types of loading the battery (or cell):

Energizing -> putting energy of particular quality and amount into the cell

Re-juvenating (conditioning) -> alternating the cell structure by passing energy to and from the cell in a certain way

For each of the process to take place, we require different waveforms (types of energy?) to be furnished to the cell?

StevanC

My understanding of energising as termed by John Bedini, is both charging and conditioning a battery using high voltage at low current just using the energy discharged from a previously charged coil (not to be confused with back EMF). John Bedini claims that this process prolongs the life of a battery by lowering a batteries internal resistance so that it is able to attain a higher working capacity than could be achieved by conventional DC charging.

I see re-juvenating as a process of cycling between energising and discharging in order to desulfate a lead acid type battery or cell to lower its resistance so that it can be returned to a good working state.

I differentiate between charging at low and high radiant levels. I have found that high radiant charging is better for conditioning a battery, whereas lower radiant pulse current charging provides a deeper and much quicker charge suitable for normal use. I think that a mixture of high and low radiant charging is needed to maintain a battery in good condition, especially if it is only periodically used.

Hoppy

[StevanC]

So, we do distinguish two types of loading the battery (or cell):

Energizing -> putting energy of particular quality and amount into the cell

Re-juvenating (conditioning) -> alternating the cell structure by passing energy to and from the cell in a certain way

For each of the process to take place, we require different waveforms (types of energy?) to be furnished to the cell?

[Hoppy]

I really hate to proof-read 200+ of chit-chat, if it's a good quality read, and You drop a link, I wouldn't mind to pay a visit (provided i don't have to go thru a cumbersome registration process over there too)
;-)

The guy who talked me to try aircored, got my trust over other things. He claimed that the iron only slows it down, and helps not much. When we talk aircore, we should think 'lens' not 'storage', the iron merely draws magnetism out of the copper while wasting part (altough minor) of the current too.

OTOH, there might be zero mag-filed in a toroidal transformer by some theories?

for the record:
I never made joule thief circuit, but have over a year long of Bedini type energizer research and 'head-ponder-upon'.
8:-)

And there is that thing, that i had _sparks_ between windings (visible sparks!?!) of an aircored quadfilar 3BJT powered energizer coil running from 24V 120VAC supply. The insulation was obviously depleted (a salvaged magnet wire) and the sparks where on airgaps - not touching wires.

Hi Stevan C

I too thought air cores more efficient than iron cores but I found that insofar as battery charging is concerned using Bedini type solid state devices, iron cores will reduce frequency and improve energy transfer into the battery on coil discharge. This is especially the case if the duty cycle of the waveform is reduced by adding a low value non-polarised capacitor directly across the trigger winding. This produces a 'h' shaped waveform that will give a nice deep charge. If you want a good battery conditioning waveform with plenty of radiant energy spikes, then wind the power and trigger winding trifilar and connect two of the strands in Tesla bifilar style (end of first strand connected to start of second strand). This will raise the the frequency of the radiant oscillations into the KHz range and these will be seen to be modulated by a low frequency sinusoid shaped waveform. I use 19swg copper wire for all my charger and energiser coils.

I have found that creating a two-part trifilar coil on a common iron core enhances the radiant. The three strands from the finish of the first coil are connected to the three strands at the start of the second coil. Two of the resulting series strands are then connected in Tesla config as described earlier.

Battery charging and battery conditioning (energising) are different things and require different waveforms. A high frequency, high radiant content waveform will also charge a battery but not as efficiently as a , low radiant, low frequency pulsed waveform. Also, try connecting the charging battery neg terminal to 0V ground instead of the pos supply rail as is the convention with Bedini energisers. I find battery charging is more efficient with a 0V return and conditioning best with a return to the pos supply rail.

Hoppy

[StevanC]

If you have the nerves to read the way-too-big-200+ thread about the joule thief at overunity.com, i think i remember some folks there tried aircores too with varying convincement. It seems very dependable on your overall circuit. Good for you that you are getting better results!

I really hate to proof-read 200+ of chit-chat, if it's a good quality read, and You drop a link, I wouldn't mind to pay a visit (provided i don't have to go thru a cumbersome registration process over there too)
;-)

The guy who talked me to try aircored, got my trust over other things. He claimed that the iron only slows it down, and helps not much. When we talk aircore, we should think 'lens' not 'storage', the iron merely draws magnetism out of the copper while wasting part (altough minor) of the current too.

OTOH, there might be zero mag-filed in a toroidal transformer by some theories?

for the record:
I never made joule thief circuit, but have over a year long of Bedini type energizer research and 'head-ponder-upon'.
8:-)

And there is that thing, that i had _sparks_ between windings (visible sparks!?!) of an aircored quadfilar 3BJT powered energizer coil running from 24V 120VAC supply. The insulation was obviously depleted (a salvaged magnet wire) and the sparks where on airgaps - not touching wires.

[sucahyo]

anyone tried the joule thief without the iron core?

I was all sceptic but went wow and now go mostly aircored...

Maybe because iron core have low resonant frequency. So when you increase frequency to reduce input current, it won't resonate and have lower input. Toroid should be much better than iron.

[Xenomorph]

If you have the nerves to read the way-too-big-200+ thread about the joule thief at overunity.com, i think i remember some folks there tried aircores too with varying convincement. It seems very dependable on your overall circuit. Good for you that you are getting better results!