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: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)  (Read 1998271 times)

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2400 on: August 21, 2014, 07:41:13 PM »
What circuit, the output circuit ?  :)  You're argument is circular and you are failing to consider properly what I am saying.
My "arrangement" is a set of circuits, it's an AC generator and a load, but I can make it an AC generator then a transformer
then a load and that will show why the reactive power claims are BS.

A circuit can be defined by a current loop ?
.

If I just measure the input and output to a transformer connected to the grid I'm only measuring one part of a larger circuit.

Gee wizz.

You are not making any sense man.  ;)
Of course it all depends on what you want to measure.
As long as you are measuring correctly then you should have correct results. :)
For overunity devices we only really need to measure power input to the device,
and power dissipated by the load. It is of no concern at all what the power
company is doing or what their costs are, for such measurement purposes. For the most part, we
can make a device that looks reactive at its input appear non-reactive using power factor correction components,
so we don't have to worry about any effects on the line.

If I want to buy the most efficient vacuum cleaner for a given power level, I just need
to know what the efficiency is of the different comparable power vacuum cleaners. The one that
consumes less power for about the same performance is the one that is more efficient.
If one vacuum cleaner has a lower power factor than another, this can be corrected
with some power factor correction components if a person really wanted, but it makes no difference
whatsoever on the efficiency and actual performance of the vacuum cleaners. The true efficiency of
the devices is all that really matters to the consumer. Saying that one introduces a bit more
losses in the power lines or requires more generator capacity than the other due to differences in
power factor is not any concern at all in regards to the efficiency of the vacuum cleaners. I won't
repeat myself further, but it looks to me like you are chasing windmills.  :)

All the best...
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 01:49:32 AM by Void »

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2401 on: August 21, 2014, 07:53:29 PM »
@Farmhand: Sorry, I've been busy making huge OU in VARs with TKoilVII. The phase question: If you recall my microQEG videos, I at first also got a phase angle that looked like 180 out of phase. This can be due to a lot of things, mostly inverted probes or scope channels, and also if a current transformer is used. If your true phase angle is 90 degrees and you use a current transformer like a Rogowski coil or a plain loop, this will introduce a 90 degree phase shift in the _measurement_ itself. Voila: your scope displays a signal that looks like it is 180 oop, when it is really reading a 90 degree oop signal. I did try to demonstrate this in the first uQEG and the Phase 1 and Phase 2 videos but perhaps I wasn't completely clear.

You are doing awesome work, by the way. Mucho gusto!.

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2402 on: August 21, 2014, 07:55:30 PM »
Well when I get an appropriate CSR and ensure no ground loops then if I get this shot below I can claim OU ?
That's 3.8 Watts input and 5.1 Watts out.  :) If we use the scope measurements and calculate.
When I get the proper CSR we or I will determine the phase to verify with the scope display.

Don't ask me to explain where the extra energy comes from if it does still show more real power out than in.   ;D
I'll let you do that if you want.
..
Input 12.4 V x 0.3 A = 3.72 Watts
I figure it like this.
(200 cosine = -0.987 PF)
84.6 volts x 0.987 A = 83.5 VA
83.5 VA x 0.987 = 78.4 VAR
83.5 VA - 78.4 VAR = 5.1 Watts
5.1 Watts output / 3.72 Watts input = 1.37 C.O.P
..
I think I did better with the filament light bulb and the previous setup not sure.
.

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2403 on: August 21, 2014, 08:09:12 PM »
@Farmhand: Sorry, I've been busy making huge OU in VARs with TKoilVII. The phase question: If you recall my microQEG videos, I at first also got a phase angle that looked like 180 out of phase. This can be due to a lot of things, mostly inverted probes or scope channels, and also if a current transformer is used. If your true phase angle is 90 degrees and you use a current transformer like a Rogowski coil or a plain loop, this will introduce a 90 degree phase shift in the _measurement_ itself. Voila: your scope displays a signal that looks like it is 180 oop, when it is really reading a 90 degree oop signal. I did try to demonstrate this in the first uQEG and the Phase 1 and Phase 2 videos but perhaps I wasn't completely clear.

You are doing awesome work, by the way. Mucho gusto!.

Oh OK I see now, I did miss that part of what you explained and showed. That does make perfect sense, and I do believe I
will get the correct result if I do the measurement correctly in order to show the reality of the situation.

Thanks very much.

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2404 on: August 21, 2014, 08:13:04 PM »
Farmhand, certain types of loads can be tricky to measure power consumption on.
I have also seen some strange phase shift effects when trying to measure input and output power
using different kinds of odd transformer windings and that sort of thing, and with different kinds of loads.
When I run into that situation I try to see if there is another way to approach the measurements
such as say converting the output to DC or something else.  There is not always an easy solution. :)

Off hand I don't know what the best solution is for the load you are trying to measure.  I think it
is a fluorescent tube? Maybe a fluorescent tube introduces a lot of phase shift on the current, I don't know,
but once you get your non inductive CSR's we can see what kind of waveforms you are left with. It may
take further analysis and testing to get a better idea what is happening there if you don't just
have a probe reversed or whatever.

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2405 on: August 21, 2014, 08:24:29 PM »
Well when I get an appropriate CSR and ensure no ground loops then if I get this shot below I can claim OU ?
That's 3.8 Watts input and 5.1 Watts out.  :) If we use the scope measurements and calculate.
When I get the proper CSR we or I will determine the phase to verify with the scope display.

Don't ask me to explain where the extra energy comes from if it does still show more real power out than in.   ;D
I'll let you do that if you want.
..
Input 12.4 V x 0.3 A = 3.72 Watts
I figure it like this.
(200 cosine = -0.987 PF)
84.6 volts x 0.987 A = 83.5 VA
83.5 VA x 0.987 = 78.4 VAR
83.5 VA - 78.4 VAR = 5.1 Watts
5.1 Watts output / 3.72 Watts input = 1.37 C.O.P
..
I think I did better with the filament light bulb and the previous setup not sure.
.

No idea what you are trying to do here.
The scope shot you attached to your post says 'tank traces', but
if that is the secondary tank circuit it has no bearing on the efficiency
of your circuit. You only need to show the voltage waveform across the load
and the current waveform on a CSR connected to one of the load terminals.
Watch out for scope ground loops if you have two scope probes connected
into different points in the circuit at the same time. This can also throw off
your measurements, but I think you showed that you have both scope probes
grounded at the same point.

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2406 on: August 21, 2014, 08:29:13 PM »
Void my friend, I got similar results with a filament globe. a 3 Watt incandescent filament light globe, just like most others use and
call resistive loads. But this is 420 kHz. Less dangerous at the same voltages than 50 Hz. It will not kill me unless without any large
capacitors in the arrangement. Makes it more like fun than a chore.
.


Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2407 on: August 21, 2014, 08:39:53 PM »
No idea what you are trying to do here.
The scope shot you attached to your post says 'tank traces', but
if that is the secondary tank circuit it has no bearing on the efficiency
of your circuit. You only need to show the voltage waveform across the load
and the current waveform on a CSR connected to one of the load terminals.
Watch out for scope ground loops if you have two scope probes connected
into different points in the circuit at the same time. This can also throw off
your measurements, but I think you showed that you have both scope probes
grounded at the same point.

The difference between VAR and VA is real power in watts, isn't it ?. Doesn't matter where it goes if it's shown to be more
than the input, what matters is where it comes from.
If it is shown to be accurate, then it's anomalous heat or something, but it isn't accurate is it, neither is the load power.

I want to measure the power consumed by the fluro as well as other loads and show the effect on the generator of AC
and the reactive and active powers ect.

P.S. At the moment it's cold here so I can count all the heat output as useful output. If I want to.  ;D I have no master. When it's
cold I can consider what is usually waste heat to be useful because it is, it adds heat to my hut.
.

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2408 on: August 21, 2014, 08:40:32 PM »
Void my friend, I got similar results with a filament globe. a 3 Watt incandescent filament light globe, just like most others use and
call resistive loads. But this is 420 kHz. Less dangerous at the same voltages than 50 Hz. It will not kill me unless without any large
capacitors in the arrangement. Makes it more like fun than a chore.
.

Ok, I looked at your last scope probe placement diagram you posted a while back, and I think I
understand how you are measuring the load current and load voltage waveforms. The scope probe placement looks correct.
I don't know how to explain it either. I need to think about it. I have also seen strange phase shifts like this before, and I
have seen in some such cases that a small change in frequency can completely change the measured results. If you change the frequency of the driver
somewhat does the measured phase shift on the load current change quickly? 

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2409 on: August 21, 2014, 08:47:57 PM »
The difference between VAR and VA is real power in watts, isn't it ?. Doesn't matter where it goes if it's shown to be more
than the input, what matters is where it comes from.
If it is shown to be accurate, then it's anomalous heat or something, but it isn't accurate is it, neither is the load power.

I want to measure the power consumed by the fluro as well as other loads and show the effect on the generator of AC
and the reactive and active powers ect.

..


Once you multiply  Vrms by Irms by the PF for your load, you get Watts. That is the real power P (AKA True Power),
and real power is expressed in Watts.
VA is used to represent the apparent power, signified as S. This would be your measured Vrms times your measured Irms for your load.
VAR is used to represent the reactive power, signified as Q
Apparent power is the vector sum of the reactive and real power.


Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2410 on: August 21, 2014, 08:53:24 PM »
Yeah it does change quickly with a frequency change of the primary because it's all tuned. I load the output and the primary max
voltage rises but the average voltage remains about the same, that's because the load changes the primary tune of course.
a load either increases primary power or decreases it depending on how I tune it and the load, I can tune the circuit to a load.
Or tune an inductive load to the circuit ect.

I can vary the input voltage, frequency, pulse width and vary the tank resonant frequency by adjusting the variable capacitor.
The tank and the load circuits are separate but connected circuits.

With this arrangement I can just change the pulse generator frequency and run the primary at a different frequency then tune
the tank to be resonant at or near the primary frequency. I can also tune the tank to double the primary frequency and still get
resonant rise.

..

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2411 on: August 21, 2014, 09:04:35 PM »

Once you multiply  Vrms by Irms by the PF for your load, you get Watts. That is the real power P (AKA True Power),
and real power is expressed in Watts.
VA is used to represent the apparent power, signified as S. This would be your measured Vrms times your measured Irms for your load.
VAR is used to represent the reactive power, signified as Q
Apparent power is the vector sum of the reactive and real power.

That's exactly what I said. VA - VAR = Watts or Watts = VA - VAR or VAR + Watts = VA, same thing.
ie. 100 VA - 80 VAR leaves 20 Watts missing or dissipated. Fair enough ?

I do understand the concept. But I won't take offense.  :)
.

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2412 on: August 21, 2014, 09:06:15 PM »
Yeah it does change quickly with a frequency change of the primary because it's all tuned. I load the output and the primary max
voltage rises but the average voltage remains about the same, that's because the load changes the primary tune of course.
a load either increases primary power or decreases it depending on how I tune it and the load, I can tune the circuit to a load.
Or tune an inductive load to the circuit ect.

I can vary the input voltage, frequency, pulse width and vary the tank resonant frequency by adjusting the variable capacitor.
The tank and the load circuits are separate but connected circuits.

With this arrangement I can just change the pulse generator frequency and run the primary at a different frequency then tune
the tank to be resonant at or near the primary frequency. I can also tune the tank to double the primary frequency and still get
resonant rise.
..

Yes, OK. As I have mentioned, I have seen cases like this where I measure odd phase shifts like this, but I have
noticed that if I change the frequency a little bit so that the phase shift comes more into a normal range that there
doesn't appear to be any noticeable change in input and output power. If the tube gives off about the same
amount of light when the frequency is shifted a bit where the phase shift on the load current looks more reasonable,
then although I can't explain it, it would seem to be some just some weird phase effect which doesn't really accurately reflect the
actual load power.

« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 03:18:52 AM by Void »

Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2413 on: August 21, 2014, 09:07:44 PM »
That's exactly what I said. VA - VAR = Watts or Watts = VA - VAR or VAR + Watts = VA, same thing.
ie. 100 VA - 80 VAR leaves 20 Watts missing or dissipated. Fair enough ?

I do understand the concept. But I won't take offense.  :)
.

Maybe it was just a typo then, but you wrote:
"83.5 VA x 0.987 = 78.4 VAR"
You also seem to be trying to subtract VAR's from VA's? You can't do that mate. 
They are vectors at different phase angles. This is why they all have different units.
You have to use special vector math to add and subtract vector values at different angles.
You can't use ordinary addition and subtraction.
Just Vrms x Irms x PF is all you need to calculate real power,
but of course these measurements have to be accurate.

Using your odd measured numbers, I get:
(A current lag of 200 degrees is the same as a current lead of 160 degrees, and both give the same power factor,
so the phase angle can be expressed as lagging 200 or leading 160 degrees. Either way, same result.)
84.6 Vrms x 0.98 Arms x Cos(160) =  -77.91 Watts.  Now that's impressive.  ;D
(I am assuming you are using a 0.1 ohm CSR)

I can't explain it, but I will think about it. Maybe someone can see what is happening.
The difference in inductance introduced by a wire wound 0.1 ohm CSR and a non inductive CSR
should not make much difference here I wouldn't think, unless whatever you are using has
an unusually large amount of inductance.  Probably something else is going on here.

Edit:
Do you have your scope probes set to x10 and your scope channel settings configured for the same multiplication factor of x10 as well?
Just wondering if that might be a factor for the measured voltages? That should not affect phase angle measurement though.

P.S. For your 'betterflurosh.csv' file scope data, I calculated an average power of 2.597 Watts.
I assumed a CSR value of 0.1 ohms for the channel 2 current measurements.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 02:44:54 AM by Void »

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)
« Reply #2414 on: August 22, 2014, 12:31:21 AM »
Most modestly priced scopes only offer a 20MHz filter.

For stable repetitive waveforms, a better way to remove noise artifacts on a digital scope is to apply averaging.  Averaging is usually found in the acquisition menu.  Averaging should be used with care.  Alwasy look at waveforms with averaging turned off before applying it.