1850 Watts free energy power ? New GEGENE circuit by JL Naudin shows COP = 2.8

[vrand]

yes Romero did the same test but it even was more confusing cause he never posted a circuit diagram and not everybody knows how a grid tie inverter works.....

so is this just some kind of bootstrap effect with the second power meter showing wrong values or why does it show 240 watts more input power ??

The JLN circuit is on his website:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/gegene13en.htm


The idea with the 500 watt inverter is to feed it from the feedback coil and then let it power the cooker coil. In this test it only supplied the cooker coil with 250 watts, while the grid wall plug supplied 750 watts for a total input of around 1000 watts. So net input is 750 watts.


Output of 1880 watts > than 750 watts input.


Looking good 
Cheers

[TinselKoala]

Where do you get that 1880 Watts output figure from? Doesn't it come from adding up the "box labels" of the halogen light bulbs?

None of the presently-described testing is better than, or invalidates, the coffee-pot calorimetry measurements. There is no evidence that the system is actually putting out 1880 Watts of power; on the contrary, the coffeepot testing shows that the output power is _in fact_ less than the input power. The lightmeter measurements also indicate that the light bulbs are not being supplied with the full power that they are labelled for.

We have two sets of well-performed testing that show unequivocally that the power out to a load is less than the power in. And we have another few sets of measurements that appear to be improperly done and/or interpreted, using DSO and commercial "wattmeters".  And we now have some irrelevant "looping" trials using an underpowered inverter, which itself is not 100 percent efficient. And we of course continue to mistake labels on boxes for actual power measurements.

Or at least some of us do.

[Madebymonkeys]

Where do you get that 1880 Watts output figure from? Doesn't it come from adding up the "box labels" of the halogen light bulbs?

None of the presently-described testing is better than, or invalidates, the coffee-pot calorimetry measurements. There is no evidence that the system is actually putting out 1880 Watts of power; on the contrary, the coffeepot testing shows that the output power is _in fact_ less than the input power. The lightmeter measurements also indicate that the light bulbs are not being supplied with the full power that they are labelled for.

We have two sets of well-performed testing that show unequivocally that the power out to a load is less than the power in. And we have another few sets of measurements that appear to be improperly done and/or interpreted, using DSO and commercial "wattmeters".  And we now have some irrelevant "looping" trials using an underpowered inverter, which itself is not 100 percent efficient. And we of course continue to mistake labels on boxes for actual power measurements.

Or at least some of us do.

Has anyone mentioned 'power factor' yet Sorry, I haven't read 100% of the posts

Not considering PFC would account for these (what I believe are) measurement errors.
An inductive load such as a cheap Chinese (correct me if this induction hob is a high-end, power factor corrected model!!!) induction hob is, by definition, quite inductive - this is going to mean a very low Power Factor. This would give the impression of it consuming more power than its actually converting to useful work.
http://www.energymanagertraining.com/energy_audit_instruments/electrical_measuring/how%20to%20measure%20power%20factor.htm

OP: Check out 'real' and 'apparent' power.

How about measuring the PF and correcting for it (as currently its probably not even legal to connect it to the grid!) then re-measuring. Post the PFC circuit here.

I hope I haven't pis&ed-off the OP with this info although it should save him wasting any more of his valuable time.

Ciao,

MBM

[Madebymonkeys]

Has anyone mentioned 'power factor' yet Sorry, I haven't read 100% of the posts

Not considering PFC would account for these (what I believe are) measurement errors.
An inductive load such as a cheap Chinese (correct me if this induction hob is a high-end, power factor corrected model!!!) induction hob is, by definition, quite inductive - this is going to mean a very low Power Factor. This would give the impression of it consuming more power than its actually converting to useful work.
http://www.energymanagertraining.com/energy_audit_instruments/electrical_measuring/how%20to%20measure%20power%20factor.htm

OP: Check out 'real' and 'apparent' power.

How about measuring the PF and correcting for it (as currently its probably not even legal to connect it to the grid!) then re-measuring. Post the PFC circuit here.

I hope I haven't pis&ed-off the OP with this info although it should save him wasting any more of his valuable time.

Ciao,

MBM

Just read the manual for the watt meters he's using and there is no accuracy mentioned for the PF measurement which is worrying!
If its anything like the kill-a-watt, popular meter like this and in the same price bracket, then its measurement of PF will be dubious...in one review it measured the PF of a kitchen TV at 0.57!

http://www.newark.com/pdfs/techarticles/lambda/IPQPFC.pdf

Incidentally the US PF limit is 0.90 or higher for PF on devices over 75W.

[hartiberlin]

Laurent has seen some new modulation effects here:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEGP4iBLb5I


So can anybody explain the EXTRA 240 Watts display of the second
Wattmeter from Naudin ?

Is it just a wrong display, cause the PowerFactor is wrong calculated or
the pulsed input of the cooker does jam the power meter ??

Regards, Stefan.