Author Topic: How does this snake oil really work?  (Read 90795 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MrZwing

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Country: se
  • Ohh! what does this button do? *click*
How does this snake oil really work?
« on: January 21, 2015, 11:52:15 am »


I'm curious how this snake oil work's, I'm guessing some kind of joule thief.
I'm guessing the brass tube inside the ferrite core is some primitive coil.

what do you guy's think? I'm still new to electronics so I'm just wildly guessing.

/MrZ
 

Offline mikeselectricstuff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12124
  • Country: gb
    • Mike's Electric Stuff
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2015, 12:09:26 pm »
No magic there - LEDs will light with much less than 20mA
an AA battery will give at last 3 watt-hours.
Or 62mw over 2 days.
a low-current LED will light as brightly as those shown on 1mA, =approx 2mW

So lighting 23 LEDs on an AA battery is entirely plausible.
Youtube channel:Taking wierd stuff apart. Very apart.
Mike's Electric Stuff: High voltage, vintage electronics etc.
Day Job: Mostly LEDs
 

Offline dannyf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8229
  • Country: 00
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2015, 12:20:17 pm »
Quote
what do you guy's think?

The guy's doing it without understanding what he's doing.
================================
https://dannyelectronics.wordpress.com/
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31286
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2015, 12:29:47 pm »
 ::)
Back of envelope time:
An alkaline AA has a capacity of about 2500mAh at low currents
high efficiency LED's can easily operate at that level of apparent brightness @ 1mA or less, even 0.1mA I've done before (brightness is pretty linear).
23 red LEDs in series at maybe 1.6V drop at that current is say 37V, so @ 1mA that's 37mW total.
Say 1.2V average for the cell is 3Wh capacity, divide that by 37mW and you get 81 hours.
Add some loss in efficiency for whatever step-up converter you use, and Bob's Your Uncle, 52 hours is no problem at all.
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3648
  • Country: gb
  • Electron Fiddler, FPGA Hacker, Embedded Systems EE
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2015, 12:41:47 pm »
They are using a joule thief which is powered by itself once it starts up (that is, the oscillator power is supplied by the transformer.) This will mean it can oscillate down to ~0.3V. These circuits have been around for ages and without actual power measurements no claim to extracting more than the batteries' energy can be upheld.
 

Offline MrZwing

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Country: se
  • Ohh! what does this button do? *click*
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2015, 01:43:28 pm »
oh I know it's humbug but want to know why and how the thing "works" but interesting answers. shows that knowledge is power.
the black taped thing is apparently A brass tube surrounded by ferrite cores.
 

Offline ManOfStone

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2015, 04:09:31 pm »
Hey guys,

A buddy just let me know about your little discussion, so I thought I'd enter the thread and help you along with some of your doubts, guesses and questions.

OK, let's do 'em in order.

- "I'm guessing some kind of joule thief."

It's not a Joule Thief, differing in a few ways; since it has no coil/step up method of modifying the voltage/taking the voltage up from an average of 1.1 V DC up to something higher in order to meet the demands of the LEDs.

The switching is also different from the typical basic Joule Thief circuit in that it uses a PNP as well as an NPN. The PNP is used because it has a nice 'n' low gate voltage of .7 to .9 V DC, which means that the AA can handle the job until it drops below that value, as seen in the video when I take readings near the end of the test.

As well, the Joule Thief hits the light bulb end of the circuit with a fairly A/C shaped wave form, all of which is typically directed (undioded) at a light type that makes use of A/C power.

This is an LED setup for a reason.
And that reason is that the LEDs are connected in opposite polarity to the battery.
So the battery simply isn't the thing that is powering the LEDs.



- “No magic there - LEDs will light with much less than 20mA. An AA battery will give at last 3 watt-hours. Or 62mw over 2 days. A low-current LED will light as brightly as those shown on 1mA, =approx 2mW. So lighting 23 LEDs on an AA battery is entirely plausible.

These LEDs are clearly wired in parallel.
A shitkicked year old alkaline Costco issue Kirkland will NOT 'give at least 3 watt hours'.
Check the independent quotes from others online who have published their testing of many kinds/brands of AA battery. You will find that this grade of Alkaline give out something much closer to the value I suggest in the video - around 2,184mAh, times the average of 1.1 V, gives you a total output of 2,310 mWh. That is exactly how you would expect this thing to drain if there were no LEDs  connected at all.

What I don't show in the video, and I kinda wish I had in hindsight, is the mA draw without and then with load. At the top end, when we're talking fairly fresh battery, around 64mA, the load drives the draw up by around 4 or 5mA.

And no, you can't get an LED to near full brightness on 1.4 V and 1 mA. That's just crap talk. Sorry.


- “The guy's doing it without understanding what he's doing.

Dude. I didn't ask the question at the end because I don't know the answer.
And I didn't end up with those 5 particular cores, with the correct permeability/saturation value required to exhibit this phenomenon, by happy accident.
I've been an avid student of the quantum vacuum for 16 years.
Pretty sure I understand what I'm doing, thx.


-”Back of envelope time:
An alkaline AA has a capacity of about 2500mAh at low currents
high efficiency LED's can easily operate at that level of apparent brightness @ 1mA or less, even 0.1mA I've done before (brightness is pretty linear).
23 red LEDs in series at maybe 1.6V drop at that current is say 37V, so @ 1mA that's 37mW total.
Say 1.2V average for the cell is 3Wh capacity, divide that by 37mW and you get 81 hours.
Add some loss in efficiency for whatever step-up converter you use, and Bob's Your Uncle, 52 hours is no problem at all.


OK. They're not in series. And you can clearly see that in the video. If you own a breadboard, you know the two rails on each long side of the board. They're colour coded red and blue.

These are not high efficiency LEDs. They are the dime a dozen kind, bought literally as a bag of 100, for a few bucks.

I think I'll also put up a video showing what their diet is in terms of conventional DC. Because they're hungry little buggers compared to the order of magnitude of the rest of what's going on in this circuit.
It's certainly a lot more than 37mW. That's just silly.

And there is no step up converter, here.
That is actually why I put in the two quotes from the Matrix. Back when I was still putting the video together, right after the test was done, I was using that reference when talking to another buddy of mine elsewhere in the world (who I have been mentoring in various technologies for a few years), in describing how this simply isn't a Joule Thief, because there is no coil (“there is no spoon”).


-”hey are using a joule thief which is powered by itself once it starts up (that is, the oscillator power is supplied by the transformer.) This will mean it can oscillate down to ~0.3V. These circuits have been around for ages and without actual power measurements no claim to extracting more than the batteries' energy can be upheld.

Nope. No JT, here, dood. Just check the two schematics side by side and you can clearly see that, assuming you are fluent in schematic. This video is not so typical of my regular output on that channel. Check out a few of my other ones and you'll quickly see a higher production value. I typically do high detail custom schematics and diagrams for my output, always each symbol and part from scratch, using software like Inkscape instead of the expected prefab circuit software options currently out there.

It won't oscillate below the PNP's gate threshold voltage, which you can confirm is between 0.7 and 0.9 V DC per the datasheet - part # 2SA949, Toshiba. And this is why you see the test last for only a short while after the 0.905 V point had been reached.

And I gave you power measurements at the start and at the end. Don't know what you're talkin' about there, dood.


- “I am very dubious about the identity of that large round component at the top cleverly covered in black tape.
It looks like 5 battery cells in series to me.  The video is long on hype and mystery and pretty devoid of hard facts.
I say humbug.  Move on, nothing to see here.


The part # for that component, on DigiKey, is 495-3867-ND - Ferrite Toroid  38.1mm OD.
They're pretty big. And there's simply no room in there for anything else. Besides, CapIndRes has already done the 'taking the thing apart at the end of the demo' thing, to take this whole issue into the Land of the Moot.

This isn't a deception. It's a REPLICATION. I'm suprised that more of you haven't taken the time to check out the output of both Larskro and CapIndRes regarding this technology. Your comments would drammatically change, should you take the time and show some respect.

I s'pose I could have glued the 5 toroids together in order to get rid of some tape and expose the outside paintjobs of the pretty cores, but the naysayers would still try to point out that I could have hollowed them out and snuck a small battery inside each one.

But if you took the time to really attempt this circuit, you'd find that it really does work, just like I did.


- “the black taped thing is apparently A brass tube surrounded by ferrite cores.

If you pay attention while watching the video, I describe in detail what they really are.
I also detail that you could substitute what I used for a brass tube and get the same result. It was a point about how the resistance of whatever connects the part of the circuit going through the core set is essentially zero when the battery is pushing current though during the ON phase.

I use 4   8 foot lengths of 28 gauge EM wire, soldered at each end.
That results in a 4 X 28 gauge parallel Litz wire. And the final length, after twisting the wires together, is closer to 5 feet. So it's the conventional resistance of a single 5 foot length of roughly 18 or 16 gauge. But you get a better magnetoelectric skin effect transfer toward the dielectric using what I use. That is coiled up into around 8 or 10 turns on its way through the cores. Do I still not sound like I know what I'm talking about?

But again, you can just use a straight ol' piece of brass - or a few other things; just check out their videos to see that as well.


- “It looks like just another stupid amateur ad-hoc YouTube video. There are millions of them out there.

OK. That is just ignorant. And quite trollish.

Seriously, guys. I am known by many in the community.

Endorsement (most recent one) by Matt McMahon, in his review of some of my recent output:
"Stone, this is yet another beautiful creation of yours. You're one of the smartest guys I know and there can really be no value put on the quality of your work. Great job. Beautiful contribution to the HHO community."



By all means let me know if you have any other doubts, questions, respectful comments.


Thanks for taking a look,

Stone
 

Offline dannyf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8229
  • Country: 00
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2015, 04:20:01 pm »
Quote
That is just ignorant.

It is nothing more than an oscillator. You don't have to have a physical coil to have inductance.

Quote
Endorsement (most recent one) by Matt McMahon

No reason to appeal to authority.
================================
https://dannyelectronics.wordpress.com/
 

Offline Howardlong

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4830
  • Country: gb
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2015, 04:37:19 pm »
The LED in this photo was drawing 170uA (10k series to 3.3V, assuming 1.6V LED drop, 1.7V resistor drop and apply a bit of Ohm's sauce). Given the right ambient lighting an LED can be made to "look" bright. And that was a crappy $0.02 0603 LED.

« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 04:39:27 pm by Howardlong »
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15381
  • Country: za
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2015, 06:00:15 pm »
I use those ultra bright LED's as mains indicators, driving them at under 1mA, which is still bright. I made the first using a 5mA drive, and it was bright enough to use as a night light in the room it was in. It cast a red shadow even in daylight on the far wall. Last ones are bright enough to see but will take around 5 years to use a single unit of electricity, most of which is dissipated in the series resistors. 0.4W dissipation in 2 0.5W resistors will not harm them, and as they are carbon composition ( I know, they will drift high with time, they already are at +10% of nominal value, and it will probably get to 20% in another 50 years or so) they will survive.
 

Offline Howardlong

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4830
  • Country: gb
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2015, 06:26:02 pm »
With bits from stock, no fancy inductor, just a 100uH designed for SMPS and a bunch of crappy LEDs. I also re-wrote the schematic into a more conventional format. Note that the collector on the NPN is about 3.8Vpp at 62kHz with Vin=1.5V with the inductor I used.

It's a slightly modified boost converter, in that the rectifying components are the LED themselves, and to limit the voltage and therefore current across them rather than going to ground from the collector they go to V+.

LEDs were still visible (just) down to 0.6V, but I had to go into engineer mode, with the lights switched off to see anything.

Code: [Select]
V+ ImA Vpp  PmW Est.Hours(2000mAh cell)
0.5  0 0.0  0.0   -
0.6 10 2.4  6.0 200
0.7 15 2.6 10.5 133
0.8 21 2.8 16.8  95
0.9 25 3.0 22.5  80
1.0 29 3.1 29.0  69
1.1 32 3.2 35.2  63
1.2 34 3.4 40.8  59
1.3 37 3.5 48.1  54
1.4 40 3.7 56.0  50
1.5 42 3.8 63.0  48

So no, nothing remarkable here from what I can see.






 

Offline LukeW

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 673
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2015, 06:32:59 pm »
Quote
I've been an avid student of the quantum vacuum for 16 years.

Quote
Do I still not sound like I know what I'm talking about?

 :-+

 

Offline ajb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1770
  • Country: us
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #12 on: January 21, 2015, 07:00:24 pm »
It's not a Joule Thief, differing in a few ways; since it has no coil
It may not have a coil, but it sure as hell has an inductor.  Which is what most people mean, functionally, when they say 'coil'.

Quote
/step up method of modifying the voltage/taking the voltage up from an average of 1.1 V DC up to something higher in order to meet the demands of the LEDs.

Sure it doesn't.  That's why the LEDs aren't lit.  Oh wait.

Quote
The switching is also different from the typical basic Joule Thief circuit

Okay, so it's a different sort of boost converter.

Quote
This is an LED setup for a reason.
And that reason is that the LEDs are connected in opposite polarity to the battery.

Okay, so it's an inverting boost converter.  Or is it?  Your schematic doesn't show the LEDs.

Quote
So the battery simply isn't the thing that is powering the LEDs.

Okay, so what is?

Quote
Dude. I didn't ask the question at the end because I don't know the answer.

Please, enlighten us.  I'm sure we're all dying to know.

I mean, clearly it's not the battery, so what's your hypothesis?

Quote
Seriously, guys. I am known by many in the community.

Endorsement (most recent one) by Matt McMahon, in his review of some of my recent output:
"Stone, this is yet another beautiful creation of yours. You're one of the smartest guys I know and there can really be no value put on the quality of your work. Great job. Beautiful contribution to the HHO community."

Which community is that, then?  And who's Matt McMahon?
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 07:03:08 pm by ajb »
 

Offline Excavatoree

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 841
  • Country: us
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2015, 07:43:03 pm »
I didn't know BJTs had gates.
 

Offline Howardlong

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4830
  • Country: gb
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2015, 07:51:43 pm »

Which community is that, then?  And who's Matt McMahon?

What? Matt McMahon, self proclaimed Inventor of a Free Energy bike, although as far as I can tell he doesn't appear to have actually invented it yet.
 

Offline Yago

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 651
  • Country: gb
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2015, 10:25:37 pm »

Which community is that, then?  And who's Matt McMahon?

What? Matt McMahon, self proclaimed Inventor of a Free Energy bike, although as far as I can tell he doesn't appear to have actually invented it yet.

Sometimes it works great, others it's an uphill struggle? :P
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31286
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2015, 11:38:28 pm »
I've been an avid student of the quantum vacuum for 16 years.
Pretty sure I understand what I'm doing, thx.

Welcome.
But be aware when you come to one of the best engineering forums in the world and start mentioning quantum vacuum, be prepared to have your free energy ideas handed back to you on a silver platter.
 

Offline gregallenwarner

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Country: us
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2015, 11:40:28 pm »
I've been an avid student of the quantum vacuum for 16 years.

Woah! Get your tin foil hats out for this one everybody!

It was a point about how the resistance of whatever connects the part of the circuit going through the core set is essentially zero when the battery is pushing current though during the ON phase.

That's not how inductors work. At the instant you connect a voltage source to an inductor, its resistance is nearly infinite, and drops over time as the current ramps up and energy is stored in the magnetic field. This is basic Intro to Electronics 101.

Doesn't take a genius to recognize this is a simple joule thief circuit.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31286
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2015, 11:45:12 pm »
- “It looks like just another stupid amateur ad-hoc YouTube video. There are millions of them out there.
OK. That is just ignorant. And quite trollish.
Seriously, guys. I am known by many in the community.

That's like saying that you are well known and respected in the young earth creationism community.
You could be the worlds best young earth creationist researcher, but the fact is you are still wrong.
 

Offline Yago

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 651
  • Country: gb
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2015, 12:06:46 am »
Seems all the comments on that video have been deleted.

I find it sad when people take knowledge as a personal affront.
Sure it can be embarrassing when when your ideas are proven incorrect in the public eye, but a lesson is a lesson and you should take what positives from it you can.
 
The following users thanked this post: Chris935

Offline mikeselectricstuff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12124
  • Country: gb
    • Mike's Electric Stuff
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #20 on: January 22, 2015, 12:13:22 am »
The PNP is used because it has a nice 'n' low gate voltage of .7 to .9 V DC
BJTs have bases, not gates
Quote
all of which is typically directed (undioded) at a light type that makes use of A/C power.
gibberish
Quote

These LEDs are clearly wired in parallel.
A shitkicked year old alkaline Costco issue Kirkland will NOT 'give at least 3 watt hours'.
Evidence? Please show how you measured it to make that assertion
Quote
Check the independent quotes from others online who have published their testing of many kinds/brands of AA battery. You will find that this grade of Alkaline give out something much closer to the value I suggest in the video - around 2,184mAh, times the average of 1.1 V,
Quote
An Alkaline does not avarage anywhere near as low as  1.1V over its life.
gives you a total output of 2,310 mWh. That is exactly how you would expect this thing to drain if there were no LEDs  connected at all.
...er if there were no LEDs connected, it wouldn't drain
Quote

And no, you can't get an LED to near full brightness on 1.4 V and 1 mA. That's just crap talk. Sorry.
Define "full". There are LEDs that will light as bright as those in the video at that current level, They're called "low current LEDs" and they cost a few bucks per hundred.
Quote
I've been an avid student of the quantum vacuum for 16 years.
I pity you for wasting so much of your life on nonsense. stop now while you still have time to do something more useful.
Quote

OK. They're not in series. And you can clearly see that in the video.
Makes no differnce to efficiency figures.
Quote
These are not high efficiency LEDs. They are the dime a dozen kind, bought literally as a bag of 100, for a few bucks.
Part number? Datasheet? How can you assert anything about them?
Quote

It won't oscillate below the PNP's gate threshold voltage,
Again, BJT's don't have a gate threshold voltage. Of course if you had even half a clue you'd know that.
Quote
The part # for that component, on DigiKey, is 495-3867-ND - Ferrite Toroid  38.1mm OD.
..erm I thought you said there was no inductor....
A wire through a bunch of ferrites is, let me think.... oh yes, a FRIKKIN' INDUCTOR DICKHEAD!
 
Just sit back in your chair while we plug it in.....
 :palm: :palm: :palm: :palm: :palm: :palm:
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 12:16:40 am by mikeselectricstuff »
Youtube channel:Taking wierd stuff apart. Very apart.
Mike's Electric Stuff: High voltage, vintage electronics etc.
Day Job: Mostly LEDs
 

Offline gregallenwarner

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Country: us
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2015, 12:46:58 am »
Seems all the comments on that video have been deleted.

I find it sad when people take knowledge as a personal affront.
Sure it can be embarrassing when when your ideas are proven incorrect in the public eye, but a lesson is a lesson and you should take what positives from it you can.

In most cases, not all, but in most cases, a clear indicator that someone is full of :bullshit: is when they refuse to engage in dialog, or flat out disallow it, such as disabling YouTube comments. It takes a disciplined mind to wholeheartedly accept critique, and engage in dialog. Flat out refusal is indicative of an immature mind.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31286
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #22 on: January 22, 2015, 01:04:23 am »
-”Back of envelope time:
An alkaline AA has a capacity of about 2500mAh at low currents
high efficiency LED's can easily operate at that level of apparent brightness @ 1mA or less, even 0.1mA I've done before (brightness is pretty linear).
23 red LEDs in series at maybe 1.6V drop at that current is say 37V, so @ 1mA that's 37mW total.
Say 1.2V average for the cell is 3Wh capacity, divide that by 37mW and you get 81 hours.
Add some loss in efficiency for whatever step-up converter you use, and Bob's Your Uncle, 52 hours is no problem at all.


OK. They're not in series. And you can clearly see that in the video. If you own a breadboard, you know the two rails on each long side of the board. They're colour coded red and blue.

My mistake. You are correct. Doesn't at all change any of the consumption or efficiency calculations. The fact is the battery has enough energy to do this, so to think it's some magical quantum vacuum or other such magic is just silly :palm:
Just learn how to do proper engineering and you will see where the energy comes from and how it's used.

Quote
These are not high efficiency LEDs. They are the dime a dozen kind, bought literally as a bag of 100, for a few bucks.

Have you got data to prove what sort of brightness vs current characteristic they have?
I've taken ordinary junk bin red LED's and got them quite bright at 1mA, and even less, no problem. And that was 25-30 years ago.
You have made zero attempt to quantify the brightness, nor even measure the LED current.

Quote
I think I'll also put up a video showing what their diet is in terms of conventional DC. Because they're hungry little buggers compared to the order of magnitude of the rest of what's going on in this circuit.

What sort of gibberish is that?

Quote
It's certainly a lot more than 37mW. That's just silly.

Prove it.
 

Offline ManOfStone

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #23 on: January 22, 2015, 01:43:46 am »
Ahh...  fresh meat for the Trolls...
that's all you see, isn't it?

You've all been down this road with so many fake devices with hidden batteries that you're psychologically prepared only to see fakeness in anything else offered down the road. The perception of many of you is simply polluted by a constant flow of negativism from your 'peers', backed up by a thorough brainwashing of that ubiquitous perpetration known as contemporary mainstream physics dogma.

You guys are an impediment to progress - in such a hurry to argue semantic, eyes totally off the prize of success through positive collaboration.

This is the main reason why I've stayed away from the 'best engineering forum(s) in the world' for this long. I see what happens to those who offer something. Terms like Snake Oil are quickly lofted.

I was just pointing out to the world how they can improve their residential lighting energy budget, through more efficient design than in what you find mass produced at the ol' Home Depot - that this might deserve a closer look in comparison to what corporations currently hand us in terms of product and cost to operate it.

More responses:

- “It is nothing more than an oscillator. You don't have to have a physical coil to have inductance.”

Alright. That is true that you don't. And I point to the cores, each of which have an A(L) value of 17.6nH.



re. the SMD sized LED/my kewl 3.3V circuit/circuit that uses a coil wound around the ferrite inductor types of responses

Apples and oranges, all round. Check my parts count.



- “It may not have a coil, but it sure as hell has an inductor.  Which is what most people mean, functionally, when they say 'coil'.”

OK. Count the cores themselves as the 'inductor'.
I really don't care what you want to call it.

When 'most people' speak of the inductor in their circuit, you can be pretty sure there's at least a few loops of wire, usually wound around some core material. That's where the induction takes place, like in the buck/boost converters of which others here speak, in their circuit. This circuit doesn't necessarily have any of that type of geometry/long length of loopy wire (although I did technically use an air core Litz wire, as I described in the video, it works without).

Watch the video by CapIndRes and you will more clearly see that no wire is wound around the cores. The 'wire' (conduit) simply goes straight through their centres, once. This why I bring attention to how comparatively low the DC serial resistance is on that part of the conduit - low compared to the resistance of a small gauge wired inductor you typically find at this scale.



- “Okay, so it's a different sort of boost converter.”

I s'pose you could call it that, yes. Very different. I'm good with that.



- “Okay, so it's an inverting boost converter.  Or is it?  Your schematic doesn't show the LEDs.”

Apologies. This was just a quick video I threw together in a couple of hours; not my typical output style or level. The schematic you see in my video is directly extracted from CapIndRes' video. Just take a quick look at his and you'll see that they connect at the two points either side of the core set, in opposite polarity to the battery. That way, when the switch is in ON phase, with battery power flowing through those two points, the LEDs don't light up.




- “So the battery simply isn't the thing that is powering the LEDs. Okay, so what is?”

The collapsing (yes, induced) field inside the core set.   ; ]

This is all about spending a very small amount of forward voltage from the battery on establishing a field inside the cores and turning the battery off as soon as it is established. As the field decays to zero, starting up that oscillation, polarity snaps in the other direction for a brief instant (very high voltage spike, as they say).

The circuit capitalizes on that snap in the opposite polarity - the one that mainstream academia teach us to filter, attenuate, dissipate, insulate or otherwise ground out, citing it as a dangerous and/or destructive to the physical materials used in the making of the circuit's components (which it very well is in most cases).

All I'm trying to show is the assymetric/offset nature of the oscillation. Spend a little (postive polarity) going in, put lots of stuff in the way that can harness lots (negative polarity) coming out.

And it's coming out so many times per second, the LEDs appear to be receiving DC at that brightness.


- “(I didn't ask the question at the end because I don't know the answer.) Please, enlighten us.  I'm sure we're all dying to know. I mean, clearly it's not the battery, so what's your hypothesis?”

I forgot to mention in my original post about who's work I think that this is similar to.
And that would be Tariel Kapenadze. Not exactly like. Slightly similar to.
Totally reminds me of his work in how the conduit is brought through the centre of his composite coil set. Very high voltage setup... quite different geometry to the dilectric flow...  but I see similarity.



- “Which community is that, then?  And who's Matt McMahon?”

OK. Screw the endorsement altogether. Call it testing the water. He's a fellow Canadian living in Ontario; I'm now in NZ. I was merely implying that I'm not completely unknown/some NSA paid shill purposefully planting yet another bullshit laden distraction for people to spend futile hours trying to replicate/develop something with no potential for any success whatsoever. I was trying to bring focus to my intent, which is stricly honest and positive, just like Matt's, as misguided, poorly planned and/or unsuccessful as his may be. At least he's going for it with everything he's got. Our pathetic excuse for a race needs a lot more of that.


- “I didn't know BJTs had gates.”

Base, Collector, Emitter. Gate, Drain, Source. Tomato, potato, sphincter.



I'm just talking about another, efficient way to skin the cat here, guys.
Never claimed I was breaking physical law, just bending it. Ya?

Yes, I used the term quantum vacuum and the term free energy - both loaded with buzz.

The first one I used because I find it a succinct term to describe the 'force of nature' that handles EM inductive dynamic in the universe. I'm sure you have a pet term of your own. Feel free to substitute it if it makes you feel better. It's the thing that causes the negative polarity snap/spike to occur.

The second one I used in one context. I asked whether people were tired of looking at those fake 'free energy' devices, 'because this is real', as a keyword vehicle so that people would find the video and watch it. I don't think I did use the term 'free energy' in the actual video.

I do agree that the term 'free energy' is widely abused and has picked up a massive steaming load of stigma. But it's still the term used to attract the attention of the lay masses to new ideas. I guess there is a little dirt on my hands in that very limited respect.

But again, what you're seeing in my video is what is really happening. No snake oil. I'm trying to be transparent, here. And am open to endless legit, constructive, educationally purposed questions.

For example, I've had some very deep conversations about just what the conventional meter is saying about the battery's power consumption during the test with a few people. And that opens up a whole other barrel of fish as well, to do with just how correct that cheapy meter is. I do realize that brings about sufficient cause to break out the oscilloscope probes and measure the legit wave form that the battery experiences when draining that apparently slowly. But that can wait. Perhaps someone here would like to take the time to replicate this thing and publish their own, either validating or damning, results. Perhaps not.

I was just trying to provide some clarity to those who, by their own admissions, were just guessing about what this circuit is about.

Thanks for your time and consideration,

Stone
 

Offline ManOfStone

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
Re: How does this snake oil really work?
« Reply #24 on: January 22, 2015, 01:58:45 am »
As a post script, I'd also offer how I think that there was one other factor lost during this whole process.

And that is how the increase in 'load' to the battery, from when lighting up one or two LEDs to when lighting up 23, is about the same (within a mA or two) according to the meter.

These may not be burning 20mA each, and I do plan to meter that and will volunteer to post that quantification, but I'm pretty sure that they also aren't pulling a fraction of a mA each.

I think the 'load' of the circuit is limited by the permeability, and the inductive value, of the core set.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf