Joule Ringer!

[Jules Tresor]

LEDs, future source of free energy ?

Today with commercial products :
LED bulb 100 lm/W + Solar cell 24% efficiency (Solar Cell Efficiency World Record -- SunPower Solar Cells)
For 100,000 lm/W (sun light equivalent), we need Pin=1,000W of LED, and we get Pout=240W from the solar panel. So we lose 760W.

Today with the Lab material :
LED 265 lm/W (White LEDs with super-high luminous efficacy could satisfy all general lighting needs) + solar cell 34% (Solar startups set new power records | Cutting Edge - CNET News)
For 100,000 lm/W, we need Pin= ~380W of LED, and we get Pout= 340W. So we lose 40W

Tomorrow ?!
If we reach the maximum theoretical efficiency for LED at 300 lm/W, then we will have electricity for free with Pin=333W and Pout=340W => +7W free.
Any further improvement in solar cell efficiency will increase the free lunch
Something must be wrong with these numbers I suppose, but it was fun !
cheers,
Jules

[Stephen Brown]

Ok so now I'm curious, and find myself w/o the means to satisfy.

What happens when you take 4 or so of those LED bulbs put them in a box, light them with conventional AC, measure the the lumens/watt?

Does the addition of each bulb lower, raise, or keep constant - the lumens/watt?

In other words, is there another light measuring problem here?
Does the addition of 4 or so bulbs quadruple the lumens output in that little box?

Maybe someone already measured this and I missed the post?

sincerely,
Patrick - MRN

And, what if you put each of those bulbs in the light measuring box individually.
Are we not allowed to multiply that amount?
Each room of my house would receive a percentage from each bulb?
The fine art of light measurement?
Stephen

[Jules Tresor]

Photons ?

Isn't the problem about photons, and how many we get ?
How many photons per second is one Lumen? - Physics
Perception of the Visual Environment - Ronald G. Boothe - Google Books

[PhysicsProf]

This is the same trap that Bill (Peanutbutter) fell into. You have to measure this carefully using a light box and a lux meter to really tell what is happening. It boils down to lumens per watt. Dr. Jones is right.
I'm not trying to be a "too good to be true" guy like Nick mentioned. It is just that you can be decieved by a bunch of bulbs lighting up on an AC circuit. You have to carefully look at the numbers.

Lidmotor

Lidmotor is correct. It is rather easy to "trick the eye" but not so easy to trick the lux-meter.

When you put 1 bulb into the box and run on the mains, you can MEASURE the lux with your lux meter and then calibrate for the RATED lumens (based on the packaging in the US -- I don't trust on-line lumens advertised by Chinese outlets for the reasons stated above).

When you put in FOUR bulbs, you re-calibrate the box for four bulbs because the lux output varies somewhat due to the positioning of the bulbs. No problem. With the same 40-watt bulbs putting out 500 lumens each (for example, running on the mains), you calibrate for four bulbs -- likewise for 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc bulbs.

4 such bulbs running on the mains will put out 4X500 = 2000 lumens, but will require 4X40 = 160 watts, so the actual lumens per watt does not change with the addition of more bulbs (although the calibration factor will vary due to positioning factors).

It works out in my box that there is a variation in calibration factor due to the positioning of the bulbs, and I suppose one bulb "shades" the bulb next to it to some extent.

[PhysicsProf]

Bill has gone above that in his latest video, with 104 Lumen/Watt

Jules -- where is the vid where PB sees 104 lumens/watt? that is great; but I'd like to see the vid to see how he accomplished this. The best I've achieved so far with my little Lasersaber-2.0 replication is 72 lumens/watt.

[LaserSaber]

The best I've achieved so far with my little Lasersaber-2.0 replication is 72 lumens/watt.

I have always had better results with a larger ferrite E core, metglass toroid or large air core using heavy gauge wire. I just listed the little E core on my website because it works fine. It makes a good starting point.

[b_rads]

Could they be the same circuit?

I think that it is just an overdriving situation. I use the 10K pot on mine to get the Utilitech 7.5 W bulb to come on bright then I turn it all the way down and the bulb stays on bright. Bill talks about the circuit inside the bulb in his latest videos. It is what I figured--- that the bulb's internal circuit is a major player in how the main circuit works.

Lidmotor

I have several of the FEIT LED bulbs. Last night I purchased my first dimmable Utilitech 7.5 watt bulb. Noticed in very fine print that the bulb is distributed in the U.S. by FEIT Electric Corporation out of California just like the FEIT bulbs. Both are made in China. Is it possible that they use the same internal circuitry?

Brad S

[Allen Burgess]

Lux meter.

I just bought a Lux meter from the web. It'll be here next week. What I need to do is measure the brightness of the first bulb before and after the cluster's added, and multiply the lower lumens times six, then factor the input comparisons. Let's be patient.

[NickZ]

Minoly, Allen, and All:
Minoly:it makes all the sense in the world, to me. Thanks for mentioning it.
As some guys like myself are really interested in real practical uses, lighting a house, shed, tent, or whatever. I see the point of the light box, but also of your example. Both are worth noting...
Totoalas is showing a lot of light output, also being portable, and consuming practically nothing (no cost, free light), once the low cost affordable solar panels, lights, and transformer is purchased. That means a whole lot to me.
So, thank you all for keeping up with this, doing the numbers, and LS for his great suggestions on which transformer(s) and circuit to use. I know he has put some time into this. The world is watching, or at least will be, as this all will spread like a wild fire. Sometimes in just seconds...

NickZ

[Slider2732]

Yeah, and the fire won't burn a hole in your pocket

[Peanutbutter29]

Clarify

@ Lidmotor, thanks for remembering that multiples lost Lu/W efficiency!!

-Here, with stock transformer; Each bulb lost appx 1 Lu/W, however the total light was higher, marginally. I believe around 2200 Lux with one and 3500 Lux with 6; but at a 6 Lu/w efficiency loss. Again the same paradox as with a single bulb; getting the most lumens for best efficiency.

-Note though that the v1.0 "tuned" overcame that loss and recovered back to starting 30 Lu/W. So, it is possible to "offset" this in certain configurations and to some extent.


@Minoly, I did talk about this a few pages ago when I first tested. YES, multiple bulbs DOES introduce a "theoretical discrepancy" of total light (e.g. from light hitting objects that absorb). In the case of the stock v1.0, if 1 bulb showed; say 2000 Lux. Now then, 4 bulbs in the same enclosure would be around 2250 Lux (e.g. bulbs corresponding light cut in half, which follows parallel circuit laws). Now, take that same setup, but place 3 bulbs OUTSIDE as you suggest; leaving only a single bulb in the light box. Here we are to assume an "even" light across all bulbs, while testing one. In this case; the single bulb will show 569 Lux appx. This works out to 27 Lux discrepancy per 3 extra bulbs. This was repeated for 1 IN and 6 OUT with a net doubling (52 Lux).
However this relates to about 8 lumens of variation and is most likely, indeed, from light loss from object blocking. Again this is small though.

** Conversion factors WILL change relative to 1 bulb or 6; so as PhysicsProf DID state, you must develop calibrations for bulb number. I prefer to also calibrate for bulb type as well for greater accuracy.


@ PhysicsProf and all to clarify here.
-My highest with a Lasersaber Super Joule ringer circuit; is the last shown (previous page). This is Highly viable and cheap.
*Using PhysicsProf preferred method (same calibration):
Shown setup was 76 Lu/W max @ 455 Lumens. Error of 5% though, as I don't have an 8% number to draw from.

*Using My preferred method (each bulb calibrated as well as number) We get a more realistic 59 Lu/W @ 354 Lumens. This is within 1/2-1% accurate. So, efficiency of whole circuit is ABOVE any inverter.

**If we applied PhysicsProf preffered method to the High power mode; we would assume 583 Lumens (100 over rated) and 62.3 Lu/W. Since factory is 65 Lu/W here, this would be well into overunity and NOT the case.

I suppose it's up to each person to take which numbers they prefer. I show both since we have 2 standards ATM.

About the 100+Lumens. a quote from the video description: "I decided to start from scratch and go totally in new ways with things. This is a tiny aspect of the whole and final."
I don't want to detail as I mention, but in starting from scratch ;I believe these are rather Inverse of each other, but really apply to totally different areas.

I feel both of these have their place, function, and viability. The utilitech mod with a radio shack, makes this totally viable and cheap; however many places cannot get these components. So even a viable circuit in the US may not be other places.
This Super Joule Ringer and following Lasersaber started will go long and far, i believe. You can't ever remove viability using common transformers to get light if you have none otherwise; and I feel this is the wonder of it!

@Lasersaber finally. Nice to see you post!!! been a while!! I've been waiting to see all those air core coils you showed with the SJR 2.0 video!! Several looked really interesting too! Hope things are going well for you.

Finally, ya. MASS CELL is not being categorized here and does not / should not be based against the Lasersaber super joule ringer 2.0 designs. It is wholly different (appx 13 circuits). I'm still debating on what to do with it, when completed. Guess this is more tailored from ground up for what I personally wanted.

So still my best with the SJR 2.0 is 76 / 59 Lumens per watt.

Just wanted to clarify
thanks
PB
*poof*

[totoalas]

Super Joule Ringer Light Output

Hi PB and all

as the lumens quest is improving
WE @3RD WORLD COUNTRIES WILL SETTLE FOR ANYTHING
ONE CANDLE FOR 2 HOURS IS EQUIVALENT TO ONE NOODLE PACK FOR ONE FAMILY MEAL
SJR BY LASERSABER STARTED IT ALL NOW ITS LIFESAVER

THANKS TO ALL

TOTOALAS

[NickZ]

Wait, one moment... it's late at night but let me get my calculator. Ok, now. "One candle for two hours = one noddle pack for family meal" this works out to... oh, I'm lost can you please explain. Ok, I got it now, I get it... no problem.

[Billxx]

Transformers...

I made an interesting discovery with the circuit using the fuji transformer. The primary has about 6.5 turns and the secondary with the trigger windings on the end is 1765 turns. I'm using a 3v battery pack.

Knowing the windings I multiplied it out and the secondary winding is not at a multiple using 1.5v or 3v so I wound an air core coil using a .5" coil core and a piece of 20ga magnet wire 72.15" long ( this gives .75 leads on both ends of the coil) and the coil measured at 1.7 ohms (same as the reading I got for the trigger windings from pin 2 and 4 on the transformer). I think there are 45 turns on the coil. I connected the coil between pin 3 on the transformer and a .474K cap that connects to the CFL.

What's interesting is that this doubled the brightness of the CFL.

I have a 120 to 6v ct transformer that I'll be experimenting with LaserSaber's new SJR 2.0 circuit, but, I'll need to increase my battery pack to 4.5v just to power it up using the center tap because upon plugging this transformer in the wall I discovered the output voltage is not 6v and 3v at the CT, the reading I got was 7.5v and 4.5v so I guess, unless you wind your own transformer, these various transformers can be something other than what they claim to be rated.

Anyway, there is another circuit that was highlighted on the 'other' forum where the circuit shows the trigger coil wound on the primary side of the transformer? Interesting circuit, not as simplistic as LaserSaber's SJR 2.0 circuit, but, it adds possibly a new means to control the base of the transistor and possibly control the temp? I don't know, I'm just the student in this looking to learn. Here is a link to that circuit...

A simple inverter for flourescent lamps

[Jules Tresor]

PB new channel

@PhysicsProf
PB has a new youtube channel Bill Mckraken - YouTube
We see on his notes that he has 104lm/W, but below we can read 124lm/W too
Lidmotor says here Simple --Super Joule Ringer 2.0---Boxed - YouTube that PB is modifying the caps on the light bulb itself. That's very interesting, and I suppose that's how he gets 124lm/W, but this video is private i suppose, and he sent the link only to friends for preview or something like that ... his right anyway
I think taking out the resistors in series with the LEDs (inside bub) improves brightness too, as SkyWatcher showed with his camping lamps ...

I noticed already your attention disorder dear Prof, please read care-fu-lly
love and light,
Jules

PS: Totoalas has the ultimate reason for all this research = bringing cheapest light to those in need of it We can't expect big companies or patent oriented researchers to do that