my own original oscillator

[krayvonk]

Have u guys got an original oscillator design to your name?   I do. 
What makes it different is it has no transistor in it, and its based apon the two pathways from + to - current dividing with each other.
The resistors and capacitors you pick seem to have an oscillation at a specific voltage,  but I dont fully understand it yet,  and its actually a little unstable,  as oscillators tend to be, especially if they are just wired together dodgily.  I have to put more together before ill be able to control the output frequency.
Then im onto the rest of my computer. 

</img>

[ArthurDent]

Is this posted in the wrong section?

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/

[krayvonk]

I dont get you guys,    whats wrong with this post - just tell me and be honest!!!

[T3sl4co1l]

Nice little avant-garde art project; I give it a 6/10.  I like the cryptic drawing, the complete lack of explanation or narration, and the poorly lit, blurry, handheld and letterboxed video.

What's an oscillator?

Tim

[krayvonk]

Ok, so obviously I think you guys know what your doing,  so this kind of behaviour on the internet I have no clue about.

Someone tell me whats really going on here, instead of these lame lies!

[ChristofferB]

Even the best, most thourough project would be dismissed if the documentation didn't reflect the work. From your post, I have absolutely no clue what you're trying to communicate - your schematic uses non-standard symbols, and there aren't any component names or values on it.

If you've made something cool it'd be a shame if it got dismissed due to a confusing schematic, and if you haven't, it'd be a shame that noone would be able to help you troubleshoot it.

[joeqsmith]

If you are wanting someone to replicate your work, I assume the circuit is symmetrical where R1 matches R1.   What are the values of the Rs and Cs you are using?  Are the two + and - tie together and you are just running it from a 9V battery?     

[krayvonk]

Yeh you can make it,  just remember it came from a dude from eev blog,  dont be a complete thief about it plz.

The 2 positives are just 1 positive,the 2 negatives are just one negative.
Im not sure what the capacitors should be,  but they are the same.
With the resistor values,   the numbers are the multiples they have to be of the same resistor, in SERIES.  not parallel.
Trust me, it should work on a circuit simulator if the simulator is any good.

You may not get it running at first,  and depending on the values youll get a solid hz out of it,  apart from instability.

It has a running state,  but it also has other states,  if you knock it around a bit, and play with the continuity it should start feeding back,  but if the circuit is in right, and the voltage is correct, it should work.

Also,   I hate to admit it,  but ive only got it working with the LEDS IN.  not out,   they give the oscillator more constrast but there might be a way to fix it.

Id love it if you continue the thread with your rebuild of it!!   ill be here to help if you do.   

[joeqsmith]

So example, the resistors are 1K, 2K and 4K.  But you are making for example a 4K from 4pcs of a 1K in series? 

[krayvonk]

yes.  4 in series.     

but i used these exact ones->



the cap has written on it -> 63v 1 uF.   Its only a little small thing.  and its electrolytic,  but i doubt being electrolytic matters.

If u run a 9v into the oscillator, with these ohms and farads in it,  it should be about 6'sh hz, a fairly quick one, but visible.

You may as well wire it up,  itll only take 5 minutes.   If its not responding, I can give you more help for sure.


EDIT!  sorry I have to explain one thing,   theres one slight difference,  and with that resistor theres 2 in parallel going into where it says 1 in series,   1 on the other pole and 2 in series on the one that listed four...    oops, i just double checked the circuit,  and its chirpin' away fine as i type this.

[StillTrying]

Is this posted in the wrong section?

I don't think it's even good enough for the dodgy group.

[joeqsmith]

Lets start by just redrawing your schematics based on the information you have provided.  Have a look and see if these are actually what you have built.   

[krayvonk]

Youve got the diodes in right,  but I think that your reconfiguation of the junctions isnt correct.

The pole on the discharging capacitor(2k) is there to stop current from the power(1k) from reaching the other power(1k).

Thats actually a serious modification, im not sure if that is equivilent.

You only want the power that goes through the capacitor, to cause current division at the other side,  otherwise it will constantly deaden it.

Junction order is important, especially with a bare wire to the capacitor.   You need to change the junction or you are stealing power from the capacitor line which you shouldnt!!!
Yes.   That other wire only belongs to the discharge loop,  not the capacitor through current.  Indeed its true.

[joeqsmith]

I am just redrawing what you drew in your original post.  All three schematics are the same. 

If we take it one step further, and separate your two divider networks, we end up with the following.

[joeqsmith]

Based on your markups,  do you feel the left two circuits are electrically equivalent to the two on the right?

[krayvonk]

I have to say im not sure of this simplification.

Im not sure, you got me thinking,  it might be equivilent ,  i could be wrong. 

[ArthurDent]

I cleaned your circuit up so it will now work. Relax and enjoy. 

 

[krayvonk]

I dont know what your laughing about, ive got a video of it running on the first post. 

And, Id say it IS equivilent,  so try it.    But the way i was thinking about it, i prefered it the other way.

[krayvonk]

Well how do you think I faked it,    I never have even heard of self blinking leds,  it has a buzzer on it,   but the buzzer itself is turning on and off.  Explain that one.

[ArthurDent]

My type of circuits (with no transistors either) works just fine thanks to really neat wiring like yours. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR_1Tui2Ods.

[krayvonk]

Thats beautiful work there.

But why cant I express myself here?    Are u guys just mucking around??  is this some gang entry identification test or something?

[xavier60]

Well how do you think I faked it,    I never have even heard of self blinking leds,  it has a buzzer on it,   but the buzzer itself is turning on and off.  Explain that one.

If it's the type of buzzer that's meant to be powered with DC rather than the passive type, your buzzer is the likely source of the oscillation.

Added: Do the LEDs blink without the buzzer?

[joeqsmith]

I have to say im not sure of this simplification.

Im not sure, you got me thinking,  it might be equivilent ,  i could be wrong. 

Just assume for now that they are.   Based on this, does it make any sense to you that you have formed an oscillator? 

If we assume then that you have indeed built some sort of oscillator, then the schematic you have drawn is not what you have built.   Time for some clear pictures or for you to recheck your work.

In the fuzzy video you linked, it appears you have the two LEDs in parallel, possibly back to back.     

[krayvonk]

No Joe! Its a go ahead,  I say its equivilent.     I like your new spin on the design.

PPl that just dont want to try things...   

Yeh but the buzzer has a diode in it, it just went in by accident.  The other side is diodeless (double dioded) but I dont think it matters.

I actually want it without the diode as well.

[ArthurDent]

"His circuit has neon bulbs, not LEDs."

O.K. then, here's a simpler oscillator that has no neon bulbs, no buzzer, and actually works.