Thane Heins BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER

[poynt99]

Indeed I made an error with the cycle. 

It's about 360º, not 180º across the 10 divisions.

Probably closer to 12 divisions, 2 of which are "off-screen" so we have to imagine this to be about correct. Therefore, with 2.5 divisions, @30º/DIV, yields 75º, which is what you state in the video.

PF is then about 0.259

Try the Killawatt meter for input power. It will give you far more accurate results than what you will be able to obtain with that scope and your meters.

.99

[CRANKYpants]

PS THIS IS VERY WRONG - HERE IS WHY...
THE STEP UP TRANSFORER IS FEEDING INTO A PURELY RESISTIVE SHUNT RESISTOR OF 0.5 OHMS WHICH REPRESENTS A PF OF 1 TO THE TRANSFORMER AND A VIRTUAL SHORT CIRCUIT ALSO - DEPENDING ON THE PRIMARY COIL USED. YOU CANNOT CREATE A WORSE SCENARIO FOR A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER PRIMARY.

I WILL ADD ONE OR TWO MORE THINGS HERE...
IN THE EARLY VIDEO OF 2009 WE WERE USING A HIGH IMPEDANCE PRIMARY WITH A RELATIVELY LOW INPUT VOLTAGE AND A POWER FACTOR OF 0.34 OR SO.

NOW WE ARE USING A HIGHER INPUT VOLTAGE TO INCREASE THE PRIMARY CORE FLUX MAGNITUDE WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS A SHIFTING OF THE PRIMARY SINE WAVE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins#p/u/2/sQq1-J8SOtc

THIS "DELIBERATE" PF SHIFTING IS A NEW DEVELOPMENT UNDER TESTING - THAT IS WHY THESE LATEST VIDEOS FOCUS ON PHASE ANGLE (AND PHASE ANGLE SHIFTING) AND NOT INPUT vs OUTPUT AS DONE PREVIOUSLY. TO DO THESE INPUT vs OUTPUT TESTS CORRECTLY WE WOULD NEED TO CLAMP AND TACK WELD THE PRIMARY IN PLACE (TO REDUCE PRIMARY CURRENT) WHICH IS PREMATURE AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE ARE STILL CHANGING PRIMARY WIRE GAUGE AND TURNS RATIOS TO GET THE EFFECT BUT NOT HAVE TO RELY ON CORE SATURATION TOO MUCH WHICH IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE LONG RUN.

T

[sigma16]

Hmmm

[sigma16]

I bet you had a few problems with Variant 6, didn't you?  Sorry, it is a misleading image.  MS Paint is a very limited program for graphics.

[e2matrix]

With regards the those cheap kill-a-watt meters a couple other members here had this to say about them. 
From Gotoluc who does extensive testing in a detailed manner: "@everyone,

I did the test as I said using the homes electrical utility meter because that is what counts!... I am sad  to report that the Kill A Watt consumption meter was fooled by the circuit but it was not by the homes electrical meter. For one revolution of the dial on the homes electrical meter took 5 minute 30 seconds with the bulb connected to the circuit and took 7 minute 30 seconds with just the bulb connected (no circuit) So that says it all there. 

I am happy to have found this great way of testing since some of our electronic testing equipment is not capable of doing the job correctly and this is one good example."

User wattsup: "from experience selling power factor correction systems way back, meters like the Kill-A-Watt may not be reading the exact conditions due to returning harmonics from your capacitor oscillations. The Kill-A-Watt is usually used to count the load consumption of known appliances and may not react well with devices that are obviously creating some flyback conditions. I would recommend using a real voltmeter and ammeter on the feed line to figure out the watts."

So I don't think a Kill-a-watt meter is going to be the tell-all for this situation.  I'd trust the high end scope and the only other possible bottom line solution might be an actual utility kilowatt hour meter like the one outside your house.  Except for very low power tests it might take a long time if it would even read the power at all.