COP 20.0 (2000%) Demonstration

[Aaron]

Using reactive power an energy source. Actually able to utilize "reactive watts". This is using a Tesla method that only a few ever figured out. It is based on a 4 quadrant model of course.

2000% (COP 20.0) Reactive Power as Energy Demonstration | 2014 Energy Science & Technology Conference

[vidbid]

I really like this video and this device.

Wattage becomes reactive.

A schematic would be awesome.

Amazing.

Regards,

VIDBID

[mbrownn]

Its very interesting, when I played around with resonance on electric motors I got poor mechanical performance, trying to get an electrical recovery killed off the resonance, but I did get a huge amount of heat.

Typically around 50 to 65% of a universal motors input is converted to heat. When operating it on a resonant circuit the mechanical output of my 1Kw motor dropped from 35% to about 17% but it literally heated up more than twice as fast. I concluded that the gains in resonance, and the extra losses, were being manifested in heat. Now you know why my ears pricked up when I saw this video. The only ways that I could detect resonance was a screaming sound from the coils, and a gain in voltage on the scope.

If I can find the results, I will post them just for people that may be interested.

Basically the circuit was a standard 220v 1Kw universal motor (Cut off saw) with a capacitor in parallel, I used bipolar switching at 620Hz (as fast as I could get with my primitive equipment) approximately 10% duty cycle, with a DC 22Ov 4A supply, smoothed by a 16000uf capacitor. I cant remember the capacitor rating across the motor but it was quite small. The motor oscillated at around 6.2 KHz if my memory serves me correctly.

The resonance jumped the voltage way up, and I nearly burned out the motor. I then dropped the input voltage to 120v but even so, on occasion the motor hit nearly 300v oscillations. My limiting factor was the big capacitor as it was too slow to dump current efficiently at 600Hz. If I had used smaller capacitors in a bank, it may have worked better, and could have resulted in more torque, but I suspected that it may just increase heat and gave up on it.

My variac could only supply 4A, so I was limited by that too, but the current pulses would have been much higher. The trick was to hit the motor with the current, just as the oscillation past its zero point on the rise. It was a failed attempt at running the motor on resonance, but it did produce an alarming amount of heat.

Of course in the video thy are feeding power back to the supply and that is far better that I was able to do

[SilverToGold]

Hi Aaron,

Just to be clear, are you saying that the actual circuit will be given to us at the conference from this amazing demonstration? Or just the principles alone from which we are to work out the circuit for ourselves?

Thanks for your part in bringing this all together. Seems like it's going to be quite a conference!

[BroMikey]

Wave form

Using reactive power an energy source. Actually able to utilize "reactive watts". This is using a Tesla method that only a few ever figured out. It is based on a 4 quadrant model of course.

2000% (COP 20.0) Reactive Power as Energy Demonstration | 2014 Energy Science & Technology Conference

Hi Aaron

I am wondering about the scope shot. I see two waves. One is voltage and one is current or is one watts and one reactive watts?

What are we looking at on his scope?

Pretty awesome wave shape whatever it's origin.

Thanks for the great video. The cat is out of the bag and there are to many experimenters doing OU, so it is only a matter of time.

I am willing to bet that this is the way Eric has increased or magnified his collected energy when he camps out in the woods.

Mike

[Aaron]

Dynaflux Generator

Hi Aaron,

Just to be clear, are you saying that the actual circuit will be given to us at the conference from this amazing demonstration? Or just the principles alone from which we are to work out the circuit for ourselves?

Thanks for your part in bringing this all together. Seems like it's going to be quite a conference!

For sure, the principles will be discussed. I do not know if the exact schematic will be shared. But for anyone trying to turn reactive power into real usable energy, the lecture should make it click for "everyone" that has been doing it wrong.

Without having an electrical engineering background myself, it is almost like common sense now how to make an AC generator power a load without it seeing a load.

I'd recommend everyone at least look at Jim Murray's patents. This is part of his motor generator setups: 4,780,632

Anyway, here is the lecture description that Paul gave me for their presentation: Paul Babcock & Jim Murray Presentation Description | 2014 Energy Science & Technology Conference

[Aaron]

waveform

What are we looking at on his scope?

I'd have to get clarification on that.

[SilverToGold]

Thanks Aaron,

While I probably won't be able to attend the conference, I will certainly be looking forward to buying the video for this particular presentation.

It says that it's based on Eric's 4 quadrant theory.... is it necessary for one to be familiar with this for us to understand the 4 quadrant theory so that we can make a practical machine?

Reactive power has always fascinated me and I enjoy Jim and Paul's past videos. So looking forward for something that can tie it all together so I can do something practical on a bench from all of this. I just want to see something working on my own bench in regards to reactive power!

For sure, the principles will be discussed. I do not know if the exact schematic will be shared. But for anyone trying to turn reactive power into real usable energy, the lecture should make it click for "everyone" that has been doing it wrong.

Without having an electrical engineering background myself, it is almost like common sense now how to make an AC generator power a load without it seeing a load.

I'd recommend everyone at least look at Jim Murray's patents. This is part of his motor generator setups: 4,780,632

Anyway, here is the lecture description that Paul gave me for their presentation: Paul Babcock & Jim Murray Presentation Description | 2014 Energy Science & Technology Conference

[BroMikey]

Reactive Power

I really like this video and this device.

Wattage becomes reactive.

A schematic would be awesome.

Amazing.

Regards,

VIDBID

Power is wattage. Volts X Amps = Watts so reactive power is reactive wattage. The term real power and reactive power are terms that electrical engineers use.

For instance to run a wind turbine motors are used in reverse to send current back to the grid when the wind blows these motors are tuned by engineers with capacitors.

This reactive power has been known to be collected to save huge sums of money for the last 100 years in large industrial plants.

This is old news.

In the video we see men talking about energy harvesting and CALLING it by terms that engineers and the public can relate to. The men also mention using their energy harvesting apparatus connected to a wind turbine.

This is a well thought out approach to implement a new technology along side of the wind and solar as a way to camouflage.

There must be some form of energy to get the process going so these are great choices because wind turbines are being built already. Why not make them 100X more efficient?

Mike

[Aaron]

Using Reactive Power

Thanks Aaron,

While I probably won't be able to attend the conference, I will certainly be looking forward to buying the video for this particular presentation.

It says that it's based on Eric's 4 quadrant theory.... is it necessary for one to be familiar with this for us to understand the 4 quadrant theory so that we can make a practical machine?

Reactive power has always fascinated me and I enjoy Jim and Paul's past videos. So looking forward for something that can tie it all together so I can do something practical on a bench from all of this. I just want to see something working on my own bench in regards to reactive power!

Jim worked with Eric in the past and Jim being a math and engineering genius, he understands Eric's Four Quadrant Theory inside and out. I believe this is part of the inspiration for some of his work but I'm not sure to what degree.

Jim's solid state and AC motor/generator technology is certainly based on a four quadrant system but at this time, possibly, it is not necessary to understand the Four Quadrant Theory taught by Eric. What I know is that the principles are fairly straight forward and are more simple that most people would believe. It is all in the switching. The best I can say is that it aligns the voltage and current of the reactive power so that it is usable watts. I may not be using those terms correctly, but in principle, I know what I mean.

Jim Murray has been trying to teach this for years but nobody was really that interested - really. You can see his patents that a lot of time, energy and large investment capital has gotten him to where he is now. What you see in the video is actually for quite a while back. That is not a new demonstration by any means.

Of course Eric has years of experience with these exact same circuit concepts so none of it is new to him.

Paul and Jim are working together because Paul's Lenz free motor he discusses in Magnetic Energy Secrets is virtually identical to the principles that Jim has been working on - they both came upon them independently of each other. Paul's motor is patented too and so is his switching methods. Those are worth studying to get more of the frame of reference through which they're engineering these things.

I would love nothing more than to be able to publish a specific schematic for people to be able to experiment with, but it's also not my call. I won't know the content of their presentation until they actually deliver it. In any case, I believe their presentation will share more info about using reactive power, from people that know how to do it, than anything that has ever been publicly presented anywhere since Tesla.

[JohnnBlade]

Without having an electrical engineering background myself, it is almost like common sense now how to make an AC generator power a load without it seeing a load.

Hi Aaron,

So what i have is that reactive power to? My device does not notice it loads.
ACMMJB TPU ECD QEG Load Test And Short Circuit - YouTube

I never heard of reactive power, i dont even know what it means untill you shared that movie. And i still dont understand it

Thnx!

Greets JB

[Farmhand]

Here Johnny, Here is a reference paper and other links to help you understand.

Reactive power paper
http://www.uksldc.org/Download/reactive_power.pdf

True, Reactive, and Apparent power : Power Factor

Confusions:

The undisputable law of conservation of energy states, “energy can neither be created
nor be destroyed”; yet we talk about Conservation of Energy!! The confusions erupt
when we yells out the theory of conservation ignoring other theories of
thermodynamics - like one, which states that entropy (low quality energy) is ever
increasing. Mathematical sum of total energy has no meaning to an energy user, and
hence he must be concerned about the efficiency of conversion and conservation of
energy. Similarly, though we can mathematically prove that loss in reactive power is
no real loss and no reactive energy is lost, we have several other reasons to be
concerned about reactive power improvement. This can be better explained by
physical analogies.

Basically when we have different loads on an AC supply the phase angle
between voltage and current changes, when the phase angle is 0 degrees the power
Factor is 1.0 and all energy transferred to the load is consumed by the load none
is returned to the supply, all power transferred is "real" power or "true" power,
it got used.


However if the load is other than purely resistive like a motor the phase angle between
voltage and current will change and some of the energy transferred to the
motor will be released and return to the supply, that is reactive power it is
energy not dissipated by the load and is transferred back to the supply, simply
put. And at a Phase difference of 90 degrees between voltage and current
the power factor is 0.0 and no energy can be transferred.

If the phase difference of V and Current is eg. 60 degrees then 60 x cosine = 0.5 power factor,
so 50 % of the applied or apparent power is not dissipated in the load and
transferred back to the supply.

Now we can easily make provision to convert that reactive power back into real power and dissipate it in a load already.

I could probably find Tesla's own words from a book where he states that the
closer the real power value (consumed power) is to the apparent power
(power initially applied) then the better the system is working, meaning he
tried to minimize reactive power to improve efficiency.

By definition reactive power becomes real power the instant it is consumed or used.

I thought Eric Dollard said there was no free energy fuse box.

Cheers

[Aaron]

power factor

@Mike - thank you!

@JB, hard for me to see really what your experiment is, but I'll explain power factor in terms that made sense to me. Farmhand is right on the definition, but I'll add something to it.

@Farmhand, I understand your explanation about power factor but I'll throw in the horse/rail analogy. I believe Eric saying there is no free energy fusebox was a matter of semantics because he doesn't believe in "free energy". He does however talk about energy synthesis and de-synthesis. Occasionally, he will casually mention the "free energy fusebox" but that is not in any technical discussion, just a reference to what it is referenced as. Yes, it exists, and is self-runs and keeps the batteries charged up by whatever name you want to call it - completely real "free energy" "overunity" self running device.

For power factor - there is a common analogy.... if there is a traincar on some tracks and the horse pulling it is not on the tracks but off at a 45 degree angle for example, and the horse moves forward, the traincar will still move down the tracks, but there is still this incongruity between the horse and its angle in relation to the traincar. The move forward, work is being done, but not very efficiently. The power factor would be like 0.5 or so.

However, if the horse moves over and onto the tracks so that it is in perfect alignment with the train and both are moving forward, the train can move with less energy being wasted and if they're perfectly aligned, that is like a power factor of 1.0.

It isn't a perfect analogy because I would argue that the reactive power in the horse/traincar example is bogus because work IS being done. The horse has to work harder to pull the car the same. But the point is that it isn't being consumed by the train, which is the intended load. So I guess this extra work is "returned to the source" which is the horse so it is still a pretty good analogy.

If you have bad power factor loads, it does strain the power company more. One of my friends here was a linesman and he used to put "snoops" on the line when the power company thought some company had too bad of a power factor. They will penalize the company for that bad power factor causing problems at the generator end and if it isn't corrected, they will even shut off the power completely.

Again, this is my total layman explanation but you have experienced these discrepencies between the voltage and current yourself but probably didn't know that is what it was.

When an old refrigerator (compressor motor is inductive load) kicks on, the lights might dim for a moment then it goes normal. That surge is a discrepancy between the voltage and current running the inductive load then it normalizes to a point. If there is a capacitor that is tuned for the load on the line between that compressor motor and the wall, that capacitor will be like a buffer that normalizes that power factor so there isn't a surge on the line and the power factor is corrected.

Many inductive loads are already power factor corrected like the CFL bulbs from Europe (probably not in the states), newer refrigerators I believe, etc... so bad power factor isn't as bad as it used to be.

Another friend worked at an electrical billing center in my town that does billing for major department stores all over the country, etc... and it lists their average power factor. Some are as low as .6, .7 (some worse) - that means they are paying for electricity that are not even using and by simply power factor correcting their loads, they will save a fortune. I'm talking about companies spending 5-6 figures a month on electricity.

@All, if this explanation is incorrect, please jump in.

[sturgeon]

Superb!

Excellent Video!

[Cornboy 555]

Hello Arron, I really admire your enthusiasm to explain alternative technologies to all.

Thanks Cornboy.