Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Reactive power - Reactive Generator research from GotoLuc - discussion thread  (Read 362177 times)

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Again, if you think a little you should realize that only voltage is active component of power, just  consider analogy with water in pipe. If I good remember in physics when we think about power generated (for example mechanical) by energy conversion then something must be dissipated for something to rise. Only voltage in pure Ohmic circuits seems to conform to that....the current is just a bunch of small magnetic particles and we use it to kill the dipole.... Power grid USE reactive power to keep steady voltage on line - that's what I learned from some good presentation , but of course I'm not good in electrical science and sometime must pass for e to comprehend HOW they do that

centraflow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 99
As far as "splitting the voltage from the current" or however it was put.... this indicates, to me, an incorrect mental model of what "electricity" is. Can you separate the flow of water from its pressure? I don't think so.

Yes you can, a river has flow but no pressure until you dam it in one way or other. Once damed you have pressure but no flow, until you open a hole in the dam.

regards

Mike



minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
With the river analogy we're considering the effect of gravity on water, kinetic and head.
Is this comparable with current in a electric circuit?
                                        John

centraflow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 99
With the river analogy we're considering the effect of gravity on water, kinetic and head.
Is this comparable with current in a electric circuit?
                                        John


It is as comparative as using current and voltage to define flow and pressure ;D


regards


Mike 8)

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
I have a question about something that dosnt make sense to me. In Luc's circuit below,why is the voltage being measured on the front side of the cap(across the supply),and the current on the back side of the cap?Should not the voltage and current be measured on the same side of the cap?
Brad,

The probes in that diagram are positioned to measure GRID power.

Granted, I believe some individuals posting here don't realize this.

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
If Stefan who is the moderator of this whole site doesn't know about it, then why would I?
That Stefan isn't aware of, nor agrees with my solution to this problem should come as no surprise.

Quote
To me the surprise is you writing the above... don't you think I'm taking enough hits from your buddy?...
You mean valid topical questions you ignore like this one about your moto/gen setup? Grow some balls Luc. You're not garnering any respect by whining about and ignoring important pertinent questions. OK, admittedly there was deserved hit.  :D
http://www.overunity.com/14106/reactive-power-reactive-generator-research-from-gotoluc-discussion-thread/msg381543/#msg381543

Quote
Even if it ends up there's nothing useful with what I've shared... who do you think has got more chances to loose respect from other researchers?
I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this.

Admittedly, you are learning as you blindly plow forward, but along the way it would benefit you immensely for you to stop and seriously consider everything knowledgeable people are conveying to you. You might not only learn faster, but also get the opportunity to fine tune your experiments in such a way that you reach a conclusion much faster and with more knowledge gained. Like for example when I posted that the MOT was not required to get the same effect, which you ignored.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Brad,

The probes in that diagram are positioned to measure GRID power.

Granted, I believe some individuals posting here don't realize this.
Why do we want to measure grid power?. Dont we want to know what the reactive circuit is consuming and giving back?. I tried it the other way,and now voltage lead's current??.

Anyway,i think you will find my video interesting (uploading now). Im hoping Luc will try what i have,and he may then see why the P/in is being reduced when he hooks up his reactive circuit. It seems that my theory was correct,and that the reactive circuit is interacting with the exciter circuit,and reducing it's power consumption. If you crunch the number's,you will see that the combined power across the load resistor and the power drop of P/in,is the exact amount of power consumption drop within the exciter circuit.

This is only in regards to Luc's first setup(motor/generator),and in no way a reflection on the later setup.

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Why do we want to measure grid power?. Dont we want to know what the reactive circuit is consuming and giving back?.
Those are two different measurements. To determine what the net power is (used or returned), we measure the GRID power. To determine how much power is consumed (dissipated), we measure the LOAD power, i.e. the load resistor, which is a DIFFERENT probe configuration.

Quote
I tried it the other way,and now voltage lead's current??.
Indeed, probe placement and understanding the ramifications is paramount. My videos will hopefully shed sufficient light on this subject.

Thanks for the video Brad.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Ok,so here is my first test on the reactive generator setup. Please note that this is only to show the effect that the reactive circuit has on the exciter circuit within the generator,and in no way represents accurate measurements of P/in and P/out. It was to show the power already being consumed within the generator itself via the exciter circuit-something that was over looked in other test seen regarding this setup.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AM_FoUV3Zs

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
I know he is right but you try your best to show us all that we should abort researching Reactive Power.
And your proof of this is where exactly?

What I actually have said or implied is that the results as demonstrated by Luc in his videos are not what they appear to be. In truth the circuit is behaving in a conventional manner, and I intend to show why.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Those are two different measurements. To determine what the net power is (used or returned), we measure the GRID power. To determine how much power is consumed (dissipated), we measure the LOAD power, i.e. the load resistor, which is a DIFFERENT probe configuration.
Indeed, probe placement and understanding the ramifications is paramount. My videos will hopefully shed sufficient light on this subject.

Thanks for the video Brad.
looking forward to seeing the vid Darren. Im hoping my video may shed some light on the P/in drop when the reactive circuit is hooked up.

BUT(and there is always a but) apon further tuneing,i seem to be getting a 1.8 to 2.3 watt motoring action from the generator :o. The measurements are close,so may be meter (measurement)error,but worth looking into a little further i think.

Will do more accurate measurements tomorrow,and post result's.

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Luc be carefull

Thanks rensseak for pointing that post out. I will edit it as it is not written the way I understand it to be and is not a correct description for the record.

If you or anyone else see other posts that are questionable please do point them out.

Thanks for your time

Luc


ADDED

I agree that using the word Separating is Not a good choice of word on a technical point of view but I'm sure most who have been following the topic knew what I was saying. So below is the edit to replace separating with time delay and 90 degrees out of phase.

you may have read that I've been saying this circuit is not creating energy. What I think is going on in this circuit is by causing a time delay between the TWO electricity components (voltage & current) you don't destroy the electricity (aka don't kill the dipole) by short circuit like typical everyday circuit we use.
When the electricity components are 90 degrees out of phase they can go through a circuit, do work and come back out with next to no losses if there is minimal resistance in the circuit.
Luc

Cap-Z-ro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3545
It would have been nice, and avoided a lot of disruptive noise had that error been brought to your attention in a straight forward respectful manner...instead of framing it as a challenge, causing you to react defensively, and appear less than honest and knowledgeable in the field.

Regards...



Dave45

  • Guest
Everyone is afraid to be ridiculed for something they suspect may be happening in a circuit, what ya gonna lose your tenure  ??? .
Think outside the box, I dont give a rats a$$ what they think of me you can tell that by my posts, if I have an idea I explore and consider it no matter what others think.
Keep at it Luc
All the best
dave

Cap-Z-ro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3545
Everyone is afraid to be ridiculed for something they suspect may be happening in a circuit, what ya gonna lose your tenure  ??? .
Think outside the box, I dont give a rats a$$ what they think of me you can tell that by my posts, if I have an idea I explore and consider it no matter what others think.
Keep at it Luc
All the best
dave



You showed early on that you weren't one to be messed with Dave...unfortunately not everyone has that in them.

I thoroughly enjoy your boxless approach...and have learned much from reading your thoughts and ideas.

Regards...