Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...OR YOU CAN SEE AN:
INPUT INCREASE OF 4 watts
AND AN
OUTPUT INCREASE OF 8.6 watts
(WHICH IS POSITIVE)
Thane

OK, letÃ,´s look at it that way then. So what about the extra 17W of power thatÃ,´s required to sustain this device (compared to a standard toroid)? You somehow think that doesnÃ,´t count? ItÃ,´s sitting there turning 17W of input power into waste heat, whether the output is loaded or not.
PB

Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:05:57 PM
A transformer makes use of Faraday's law and the ferromagnetic properties of an iron core to efficiently raise or lower AC voltages. It of course cannot increase power...
Thane

Exactly right. So whatÃ,´s with all these claims of 177% etc?
PB

Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...PRIMARY POWER FACTOR SHOULD MIRROR LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1.
IT DOES NOT WHICH IS A VERY ENCOURAGING SIGN THAT SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED MMF'S ARE NOT MUTUALLY COUPLING BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY.

We discussed that already. You have multiple secondaries so the impedance and power factor that's reflected to the primary is the combination of all of them, not just of the one that's connected to your resistive load. The extra secondary(ies) are very important (as shown by the fact that they're consuming lots of power, even when your main load is disconnected) and they have a PF of 0.2 - so it's normal that, combined with the resistive load on the main secondary, they'll reflect a PF of somewhere between 0.2 and 1.0 - which is indeed the case: you've measured 0.26. All of this is normal transformer behaviour. (At least, it's normal for a transformer that has those extra power-hogging secondaries built into it).
PB

Quote from: polarbreeze on April 07, 2008, 11:31:23 AM

Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...OR YOU CAN SEE AN:
INPUT INCREASE OF 4 watts
AND AN
OUTPUT INCREASE OF 8.6 watts
(WHICH IS POSITIVE)
Thane

OK, let?s look at it that way then. So what about the extra 17W of power that?s required to sustain this device (compared to a standard toroid)? You somehow think that doesn?t count? It?s sitting there turning 17W of input power into waste heat, whether the output is loaded or not.
PB

IF WE TAKE THE CONVENTIONAL TOROID AS SHOWN IN THE PHOTOS POSTED AND CUT ACROSS THE CORE SUCH THAT IT NOW BECAME "C" SHAPED RATHER THAN "O" YOU COULD EASILY RECREATE THE EXACT NO LOAD STARTING POINT OF 17 watts SIMPLY BY INCREASING THE CORE RELUCTANCE.

NOW WHEN WE PLACE THIS SAME "C" TOROID ON LOAD YOU WILL NEVER IN A MILLION POLAR DUMBASS LIGHT YEARS GET MORE THAN 1 watt OUT FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL 1 watt IN. THE RATIO WILL ALWAYS BE 1 : (TO LESS THAN 1) ACCOUNTING FOR INTERNAL LOSSES.

THE POINT IS FOR ANYONE WHO IS JUST SLIGHTLY MORE PERCEPTIVE THAN PB - YOU WILL NEVER SEE INTERNAL GAINS LIKE THE ONES WE ARE OBSERVING IN THE LAB AT OTTAWA U FROM A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER.

THE FOCUS OF OVERALL EFFICIENCY AT THIS POINT IS SIMPLY IMMATURE AND PREMATURE - ALBEIT FUN TO IMAGINE.
I HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY THE OPERATIONAL CRITERIA AND THE TRANSFORMER ALREADY SURPASSES IT AND WE ARE ALSO DILIGENTLY WORKING TOWARDS SATISFACTORY METERING - WHICH WILL BE PERFORMED BY A THIRD PARTY STARTING THIS WEEK PERHAPS.

THE TRANSFORMER PROTOTYPE IS MEANT TO SHOW PROOF OF CONCEPT ONLY - OF HOW WE CAN ISCOLATE THE PRIMARY FROM SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED FIELDS AND HOW WE CAN UPSET THE MUTUAL COUPLING COEFFICIENT AND CAUSE THE SECONDARIES TO SELF REGULATE THEIR OWN VOLTAGES ACROSS THE LOAD.  

THE PRIMARY POWER DRAW AT NO LOAD IS A FUNCTION OF THE PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH HAVING A PRIMARY WHICH IS REMOVABLE IN ADDITION TO BEING TOO THIN WITH NON OPTIMIZED NUMBER OF PRIMARY TURNS.

FOR ANYONE WHO DOES NOT SUFFER FROM Perpetual Boneheadedness THE ADVANCEMENTS PRESENTED HERE SHOULD BE OBVIOUS EVEN IN LIGHT OF THE NON RELEVANT LIMITATIONS.

Thane

Quote from: polarbreeze on April 07, 2008, 02:13:20 PM

Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...PRIMARY POWER FACTOR SHOULD MIRROR LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1.
IT DOES NOT WHICH IS A VERY ENCOURAGING SIGN THAT SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED MMF'S ARE NOT MUTUALLY COUPLING BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY.

We discussed that already. You have multiple secondaries so the impedance and power factor that's reflected to the primary is the combination of all of them, not just of the one that's connected to your resistive load. The extra secondary(ies) are very important (as shown by the fact that they're consuming lots of power, even when your main load is disconnected) and they have a PF of 0.2 - so it's normal that, combined with the resistive load on the main secondary, they'll reflect a PF of somewhere between 0.2 and 1.0 - which is indeed the case: you've measured 0.26. All of this is normal transformer behaviour. (At least, it's normal for a transformer that has those extra power-hogging secondaries built into it).
PB

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, PB YOU KNOW NOTHING - COME TO THE LAB AND LEARN.

Thnae