Reactive power - Reactive Generator research from GotoLuc - discussion thread

[verpies]

Ok, i took a quick shot at trying to get a flatline response on the parallel (left) bulb during resonance by manipulating the cores inside the coils.

Actually, for this experiment I had in mind a maximal and symmetrical fill with the ferrite "core sausage".

I was expecting to read: 
Without the sole bulb connected across the secondary, the resonance of the parallel LC tank formed by the primary winding is A
...and with the sole bulb connected across the secondary this primary resonance frequency is B.

[Farmhand]

Is there anywhere I can see how that thing is constructed?

I could not hear and understand anything you said.  Is that tight bearing really the only component responsible for that racket?

It's just a universal motor from a 240 volt vacuum cleaner with a plate and rotor bolted to it and the entire motor and rotor is bolted to the wooden platform (which magnifies the noise a bit). The toroid is just a transformer I had with "four separate transformers" wound on the core and the opposite ones are connected in series. The magnets are diametrically magnetized.

The bearing isn't responsible for the noise most of that is from the stuff on the bench and the brushes in the motor, plus I was in a tin shed with all the windows shut at midnight, so there was no other noise and I was not trying to talk over it as there was not much to say. The bearings are both tight, the shaft has no longitudinal play and the bearings are pressing hard on each end of the armature which makes it use a bit more power than normal. The brushes do make a bit of noise, they need replacing.

Not much was really said in the video, no claims being made, but I must say it has a lot less drag than most generators I have made (aside from the tight shaft in the bearings). It does "load down" when loaded though in normal operation. I've got some idea's to get the wave form better. And I should get much better voltage/power with a better rotor ( that one I had already laying around), I whipped up that setup in a couple of hours. Basically I have a rotating "permanent magnet field" and an annular armature/stator wound Tesla motor/converter style. I intend to make the rotor and magnet placement so the waveform is more classically sinusoidal.

Each Phase has two opposite coils and together they measure about 460 mH that's per phase. It also has some thicker shorter coils wound on there in bifilar pairs ( they were for using the transformer as an inverter ) It may help if I connect all the coils in each quarter in series then connect the opposite quarters in series to get the highest output (use all the wire).

The brushes in he universal motor need attention as well, they are cut down, I have plenty of spares, I even have a 1200 Watt motor the same and a 2000 watt one as well, the one i'm using now is a 1600 Watt motor and has seen a lot of use and abuse, they are designed for 240 AC but I just power them with DC mostly. I use a 5 amp 40 volt boost converter mostly. 70 Watts max. But it can run from AC as well.

Cheers

P.S. Having no pole projections there is no cogging.  Good for wind generator. But if Luc can help me make one phase power the other for free I won't need wind. 

To explain the bearing situation I replaced the bearings and the new ones are a bit higher and I left in the spacing washer, I just need to shim the frame or remove the spacing washer or replace it with a thinner one to give some up-down shaft play and let it spin freely..

Theoretically I should be able to power the coils with two phases of current and turn the rotor to generate DC from the universal motor.

..

The magnets aren't even centered vertically to the coils yet, the new rotor will be double thickness and totally encase the magnets.

..

   

[itsu]

Actually, for this experiment I had in mind a maximal and symmetrical fill with the ferrite "core sausage".

I was expecting to read: 
Without the sole bulb connected across the secondary, the resonance of the parallel LC tank formed by the primary winding is A
...and with the sole bulb connected across the secondary this primary resonance frequency is B.

Ok,  i gave it another try and now know why i mentioned that it did not work as expected.
Probably i misunderstand something, but the resonance frequencies differ only 80Hz, which makes it very hard to tune/compensate i guess.
The figures are:

Without the sole bulb connected across the secondary, the resonance of the parallel LC tank formed by the primary winding is 3.520KHz
...and with the sole bulb connected across the secondary this primary resonance frequency is 3.6KHz

So it is like you mentioned in an earlier post, but very marginally:

he would find that fP is higher with a loaded secondary winding than with an unloaded or open secondary winding.

But the next line is, as mentioned before, not that easy to perform:

Finally, if he tuned* the secondary LC tank's resonance frequency (fS) to be equal to the primary resonance frequency (fP) under load, according to the procedure just outlined above, then the whole system would behave more perfectly (like in the first video).

Video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSEGV_MOMwY&feature=youtu.be

Regards Itsu

[verpies]

OK, I gave it another try and now I know why I mentioned, that it did not work as expected.
Probably I misunderstand something, but the resonance frequencies differ only 80Hz,

You did not misunderstand anything, but I apologize for using two words interchangeably ("open" and "unloaded"). The were synonymous.

The difference in frequency would be larger than 80Hz if you moved the "ferrite sausages" to the middle of the two coils (because that would increase the coefficient of their mutual inductance).

The only thing I would do differently, is sensing the voltage across the primary capacitor and tune for max voltage there, because the signal would be less noisy across this capacitor than across the primary bulb.

P.S.
That double dip is what Gyulasun was driving at. 
If you did the frequency sweep with the SG and the scope connected like we did once in the past, you'd actually see the double dip on the screen of the scope. 
BTW: I am not asking you to do a frequency sweep for this simple experiment - I know it's a hassle to set up

I am interested, however, if your new scope has adjustable persistence in the XY mode (...or a 'Clear Screen" input). 
I remember that the old scope did not have it, and because of that shortcoming we could not do fast exponential frequency sweeps (only slow linear sweeps).

[itsu]

You did not misunderstand anything

The difference in frequency would be larger than 80Hz if you moved the "ferrite sausages" to the middle of the two coils (because that would increase the coefficient of their mutual inductance).

P.S.

I am interested, however, if your new scope has adjustable persistence in the XY mode (...or a 'Clear Screen" input). 
I remember that the old scope did not have it, and because of that shortcoming we could not do fast exponential frequency sweeps (only slow linear sweeps).

Ok,  great.

I can move the core and see what happens.

Let me check this scope for this "adjustable persistence in the XY mode"

Regards Itsu