Reactive Generator Research for everyone to share

[Farmhand]

Agreed, *skeptics* was an euphemism please note I used the term "ShillKill"

So you want the blueprints to be able to let elders go on their own... Generous thoughts!
However I would think of you as an old man and I would consider you would work your way up to the old age. Here it goes:
energia libera punctu zero - YouTube
And now is my turn to wish you good luck mate. Sorry no free blue prints, just work for your wishes! It apears your signature is not entirely sincere.

Well you are a very small minded, get it straight, I do not need any thing from anyone. Especially not empty promises and false information.

I want people to prove the things they say and put forward as truth.

Any power dissipated by a load is real power by definition.

If there are any shills in this situation it is you. Forget attacking me and
address the issues raised. Or not, makes no difference to me but when you
attack me personally it shows the shill likeness in full shining light. Grow up.

Cheers

P.S. Who addressed you anyway Barbosi ? Who made you the detector of "shills" ?
What do you bring to the technical discussion here ? I wasn't addressing you.
If I wasn't unnecessarily provoked I would not need to respond. I would have said my piece and left it at that.
You make it worse by getting personally abusive. Address the issue why not ?

How can it be considered reactive power is dissipated by a load. It doesn't even make sense.
Dissipated power is/was real power by definition. Get over it. Or counter my point with intelligible argument.

..

[Allcanadian]

@Farmhand

I want people to prove the things they say and put forward as truth.
Any power dissipated by a load is real power by definition.

"What is the truth when the truth is unacceptable" -- T.H.Moray

I would agree real power is considered to be power dissipated in a load as well reactive power is considered to be power not dissipated in the load but stored in a circuit element, L, C or other. At which point we have a problem because to my knowledge there is no actual term to describe power which is not dissipated in a circuit element but transforms energy in another circuit element manifesting as real power.
So one has to wonder, how do we describe something using a term which does not exist without contradicting other terms?.

It cannot be real power because it does not dissipate, it cannot be reactive power because it is involved in a process manifesting as real power, so what is it?. If your going to debate what it is not then the least you can do is tell us what you think it is.

AC

[Mario]

Hi Luc,

happy birthday and thank you for sharing all this. Having done quite a few resonance experiments I think I understand most of it.
One question though, why did you have to make the secondary of the transformer of the motor part resonant too? Could you not get the same result by tuning the primary only?

thanks,
Mario

[Allcanadian]

Hello Gotoluc

Happy Birthday and that was a very well presented video.

I would like to offer some advice if I could because I have been down this road many times in the past just as you have. I'm always looking for the weak link in my experiments and in this case it may be your watt meter.

I moved to hall effect current sensors a while back and I am very pleased with the results.
here is the link--http://www.digikey.ca/product-search/en?x=-859&y=-73&lang=en&site=ca&KeyWords=620-1239-nd
The Allegro ACS756KCA-050B-PFF-T is an AC 50A hall effect current sensor.

I also bought a few 100 amp hall sensors and allegro has some great products at a reasonable price point. Setup is easy, the two main tabs go in series with current to be measured then connect 5-9v supply on one pin, ground on the other then output pin and ground to scope. Next use a voltage divider to measure voltage and send to scope. I see your scope has math so it's pretty straight forward however if you do not have 4 channels on your scope there is an easy fix for that as well.

If you want to measure any number of channels in a relative sense such as your AC input and AC output then I simply add two DPDT relays to switch between my scope and the inputs. For instance, you have two channels for input voltage and current (power) connect these to the outside contacts of the relays. Next connect the output voltage and current (power) to the other outside contacts of the relays then the scope channels A and B to the common inside contacts. We can now switch between AC input and AC output with the relay to the scope.

I simply take a screen/scope shot of input and output then overlay them in photoshop or another photo editor and I have a very accurate indication of exactly how they relate to one another in time. As well I always calibrate each current/voltage sensing element on a single line to ensure they are all within specs. I went further using an Arduino with an 8 relay board($12 ebay) for 8 input channels selected with an input pad and LCD display, works awesome.

I do it this way not so much to prove anything to anyone else but rather to prove matters for myself. As such I am not too concerned with real numbers and math but want to know exactly how one measure relates to another. I don't spend any real time calculating actual watts to three decimal places but rather see how input voltage,current and power compare or relate to one another in time.

Hope this helps in some way, happy hunting

Regards
AC

[Duncan]

instrument error?

Hi AC It would seem gotoluc has been contracted to work on his project by a third party and is not to be expected to comment further on open forum as shown in this comment under his video. I hope Its not a “buy off” and he manages to return with more information and updates .. but I guess like us all he's obliged to, if not keep the wolf from the door at least try and throw a few rocks at it! Indeed in a way I'm glad to see a COP>1 researcher receive some sort of remuneration . 1 days oil revenue would give every researcher on this forum a decent lab .. that's not going to happen though is it?



It seems the effect has now been duplicated by several notably by Romero and gyula over at OU.com .. quite apart from my observations regarding reactive battery charging.
Whilst “instrument error” might be a factor as I also suggested in an earlier post, as more people replicate the principle using their own very different flavours of instruments it becomes a very unlikely in fact an almost negligible factor... whilst having no instruments to measure reactive current the battery experiments alone tell me there is a large reactive current that is charging batteries.
The question being asked here by gotoluc,George wiseman,Romero,gyula,John and indeed me .. is simply this … has the teaching of 130 years regarding “reactive power” as a totally watt - less component been totally corrupted and wrong as these repeated experiments indicate?
If that's the case and it starts to seem as if it is, the implications are astounding anyway AC as more guys test the water no doubt we'll see

[Allcanadian]

@Duncan

The question being asked here by gotoluc,George wiseman,Romero,gyula,John and indeed me .. is simply this … has the teaching of 130 years regarding “reactive power” as a totally watt - less component been totally corrupted and wrong as these repeated experiments indicate?
If that's the case and it starts to seem as if it is, the implications are astounding anyway AC as more guys test the water no doubt we'll see

Understanding AC electrodynamics is hard enough however when parameters fall outside the norm it is very easy to be misled. Which is why I tend to build most of my own dedicated instrumentation to find the facts of the matter.

As well the simple "reactive circuit" gotoluc posted is anything but simple. We have one inductance-- the variac followed by a capacitor then another inductor--the primary. Followed by mutual inductance in the MOT between the primary/secondary. But nobody considered the variac did they?,because it is such a familiar component it was just considered benign. Nor did they consider where the measuring devices were connected in relation to the L-C-L/L-R circuit.

If there is a devil I believe his name is familiarity if not complacency and I have always found it odd that even the most insane things can be considered the norm. We routinely drink water laced with known toxins (Chlorine and Fluoride) and think nothing of it. However now a few bright scientists have started doing bottom up testing versus top down testing such is found in WHIMIS and found many common chemicals are toxic even at ultra low levels. That is the chemicals become toxic to the human body well below the levels considered safe which nobody actually tested... go figure. As such it should come as no surprise that the odds of getting Cancer are now 1 in 3 for men and 1 in 2 for women and nobody can seem to figure out why.

We have to re-think everything then re-think it again.

AC

[Armagdn03]

Explanation?

Hello all!

@ Allcanadian

about 5 years ago I posted this video entitled "Fun with LCs"(quite sure you have seen this).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNYUu1VL1aM

Essentially this is a automatic impedance matching transformer. The single layer solenoid is in reality a half wave transmission line. The input travels down the transmission line to the pick up coil attached to the load. What is not absorbed by the nature of the load is then reflected back down the half wave resonator. The path to the load, then the reflection represents a full wave (180 degrees + 180 degrees = 360 or full wave). Due to this when it returns to the primary, it is in phase with the next impulse from the signal generator and there is constructive interference. The next wave is then the original amplitude plus the reflection. This then travels back to the load where it is partially absorbed, and partially reflected. The next reflection repeats the aforementioned cycle to constructively add to the next pulse from the sig gen.

Within several cycles the impinging wave reaches an equilibrium with the load and an impedance match is had. What is not used is essentially saved for the next cycle in an electrically resonant "flywheel". The wave form of current and voltage are a perfect 90 degree phase differential.

I think this is very much the same as what you are accomplishing, however I did not use any iron within the resonant portion, so that I could accomplish the highest possible Q factor without core losses.

I dare say, you are simply reaching the "sweet spot" matching the impedance of the source to the load, hence the increase in efficiency and power transfer (maximum power transmission theorem). I could absolutely be incorrect on this as I did not read all posts and may have missed something, but thought I would comment none the less...or none the more? not sure which HA HA HA.

Andrew

[boguslaw]

Andrew

I posted a simple example how to check it. With LC tank circuit on primary.
I agree with explanation but this is only one of two possible explanations !
Second one is more important and maybe not correct so it has to be checked if there is really the return of energy to the primary in phase.

[boguslaw]

Hello all!

@ Allcanadian

about 5 years ago I posted this video entitled "Fun with LCs"(quite sure you have seen this).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNYUu1VL1aM

Essentially this is a automatic impedance matching transformer. The single layer solenoid is in reality a half wave transmission line. The input travels down the transmission line to the pick up coil attached to the load. What is not absorbed by the nature of the load is then reflected back down the half wave resonator. The path to the load, then the reflection represents a full wave (180 degrees + 180 degrees = 360 or full wave). Due to this when it returns to the primary, it is in phase with the next impulse from the signal generator and there is constructive interference. The next wave is then the original amplitude plus the reflection. This then travels back to the load where it is partially absorbed, and partially reflected. The next reflection repeats the aforementioned cycle to constructively add to the next pulse from the sig gen.

Within several cycles the impinging wave reaches an equilibrium with the load and an impedance match is had. What is not used is essentially saved for the next cycle in an electrically resonant "flywheel". The wave form of current and voltage are a perfect 90 degree phase differential.

I think this is very much the same as what you are accomplishing, however I did not use any iron within the resonant portion, so that I could accomplish the highest possible Q factor without core losses.

I dare say, you are simply reaching the "sweet spot" matching the impedance of the source to the load, hence the increase in efficiency and power transfer (maximum power transmission theorem). I could absolutely be incorrect on this as I did not read all posts and may have missed something, but thought I would comment none the less...or none the more? not sure which HA HA HA.

Andrew

Did you measured the consumption of amps when motor is loaded in your video ? What is going on in this time on primary ? Consumption from power source rise or fall or is steady the same as in not-loaded example ?

[Muon]

This observation by Nerzh Dishual at our.com : what do you think?
(Steve)

[Armagdn03]

Did you measured the consumption of amps when motor is loaded in your video ? What is going on in this time on primary ? Consumption from power source rise or fall or is steady the same as in not-loaded example ?

About year after I made the video, I did a full investigation on the power consumption vs input, along with many other factors including phase angles, loss etc.

The impedance of the shown LC network is variable based on the load. When there is no load, the impedance approaches infinity, though in practice this is not possible, so we can just say it is at its highest point. Here losses (ohmic, capacitive induction etc.) bring the impedance to a halt at some point. When a load is attached, the impedance of the network drops by the impedance of the load. So for example with a small DC motor, you could mechanically load the shaft, decreasing the impedance of the motor, and wallah, the network decreases its impedance also to match, keeping as close as possible to the maximum power transmission theorem.

The power consumed equals the consumption of the motor in what ever run state you have it in, minus the aforementioned losses of the network. Obviously there is loss in the circuitry creating the impulses, however I did not include this, as I wanted to "divide and conquer" the measurement scheme.

[Armagdn03]

Andrew

I posted a simple example how to check it. With LC tank circuit on primary.
I agree with explanation but this is only one of two possible explanations !
Second one is more important and maybe not correct so it has to be checked if there is really the return of energy to the primary in phase.

There is actually no need to have an LC tank on the primary, as the impedance the primary sees is dependent on the rest of the transmission line resonator. For optimal results you would measure the rough resonant frequency of the network, then wind a primary which has an inductive time constant equaling 1/4 of this frequency. This way you are at roughly 63% the maximum current possible during the rise time of the hertzian cycle. Or you can do it the way I did it at first LAZY, make a winding with multiple taps. Not quite as perfect but gets you to see the result faster for the impatient.

[Muon]

Below is the first test recommended by Luc, and note his claim that one can get more output power than measured input power.

@Armagedn (or AC) -- are you SAYING that Luc is wrong in his claim of COP>1?

I'd like to understand what you are saying ABOUT LUC's CLAIMS, not so much interested in further lessons about tank circuits.

Are you saying that Luc somehow is NOT measuring ALL the input power, all the power getting into the system? If you are saying this, is there a different kind of meter (rather than a simple kill-a-watt etc) that would show the TRUE power going in, from the mains?

[bbem]

Has this guy implemented the reactive generator?
Чудеса свободной энергии. Часть 2-я - YouTube

[Allcanadian]

@Muon

Are you saying that Luc somehow is NOT measuring ALL the input power, all the power getting into the system? If you are saying this, is there a different kind of meter (rather than a simple kill-a-watt etc) that would show the TRUE power going in, from the mains?

Maybe it's time for a few facts, first Luc claimed they searched the internet and found no comparable circuit. It took me under 10 minutes to find that this is in fact a ferroresonant transformer circuit first developed around 1907. The primary side capacitor, transformer primary and motor form a series ferroresonant circuit and with the secondary a parallel ferroresonant circuit.

Next concerning the accuracy of the kill-a-watt meter.

Kill-A-Watt power meter accuracy - AnandTech Forums
Quote:
--The killawatt is terrible at inductive loads, so don't use it for measuring those.
--Its not accurate at measurements of small wattages.
--The sampling rate is very low compared to meters like the fluke, so it can miss quick spikes or surges in usage
--Yes these among other issues (greater than 100% efficiency) show up when using a Kill-A-Watt with a PC power supply.

Now to recap, the kill-a-watt meter is not to be used on inductive loads, small wattages and frequently shows efficiencies over 100% on common circuits. Does this sound familiar?, it should because this is exactly what Luc claimed he is doing in his circuit and the result is not uncommon.

I like Luc but it's like that saying--"real friends don't let their friends drive drunk" and if he has made some critical errors and I believe he has then someone should point them out. As well about 10 posts back I explained how an Allegro AC hall effect current sensor/oscilloscope on input/output would most likely solve many of these issues.

I'm all for innovative and creative idea's however at the end of the day we need real facts concerning real devices. We need things that work but I have a nagging feeling that this ain't one of them even if it is a very interesting idea. I appreciate his efforts and I really had to think about the dynamics involved.

AC