Electric Energy Economizer !!

  • Thread starter Economic Systems
  • Start date
"Keith R. Williams" <krw@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a63df869880ac1998aa6b@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <oj4v+tAOlR+$EwCo@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Ross Mac <this.is.a.mung@e
xample.invalid> wrote (in <yo0Kb.597415$0v4.23524771@bgtnsc04-news.ops.w
orldnet.att.net>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Sun, 4 Jan
2004:

Since power is measured by the meter, when the power factor is
corrected,
would there not be a savings of power ???

The ordinary rotating disc meters measure real power only. They do not
measure 'reactive power', which is badly named anyway.

You prefer "imaginary" power? My brother, an engineer in the
power biz, *hates* that term (though it is real ;-). The media
(thus politicians) can't grasp the concept of the "imaginary", so
cannot spend money on the problem. According to him, the August
debacle wouldn't have happened if the power companies could
control the 'j'. ...it's not like "imaginary" power is free
either!
Click to expand...
That's why some political oriented papers are calling for requirements on
'voltage support' and 'voltage regulation'. With deregulation here in NY,
independent generators don't *want* to carry MVARS, but *somebody* has to.
A whole other rate structure and pricing setup for open bidding of 'voltage
services'?? With all the same kinds of 'day-ahead pricing' and related
stuff.

"You shall live in interesting times."
daestrom
 
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that daestrom <daestrom@NO_SPAM
_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote (in <Io_Kb.125403$JW3.65999@twister.nyroc.rr.co
m>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

That's why some political oriented papers are calling for requirements on
'voltage support' and 'voltage regulation'. With deregulation here in NY,
independent generators don't *want* to carry MVARS, but *somebody* has to.
A whole other rate structure and pricing setup for open bidding of 'voltage
services'?? With all the same kinds of 'day-ahead pricing' and related
stuff.
Click to expand...
Independent control of reactive current could be VERY bad news for
system stability.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
 
In article <L3NnrQAYJl+$EwGZ@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a63df869880ac1998aa6b@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Mon, 5 Jan 2004:
In article <oj4v+tAOlR+$EwCo@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Ross Mac <this.is.a.mung@e
xample.invalid> wrote (in <yo0Kb.597415$0v4.23524771@bgtnsc04-news.ops.w
orldnet.att.net>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Sun, 4 Jan
2004:

Since power is measured by the meter, when the power factor is corrected,
would there not be a savings of power ???

The ordinary rotating disc meters measure real power only. They do not
measure 'reactive power', which is badly named anyway.

You prefer "imaginary" power? My brother, an engineer in the
power biz, *hates* that term (though it is real ;-). The media
(thus politicians) can't grasp the concept of the "imaginary", so
cannot spend money on the problem. According to him, the August
debacle wouldn't have happened if the power companies could
control the 'j'. ...it's not like "imaginary" power is free
either!

No, I can see the problems with 'imaginary', which is also a poor name
by itself. Both words, 'reactive' and 'power' are misleading to non-
technical people. I don't have a suggestion for a better name that I
feel is good enough to withstand the inevitable challenges.
Click to expand...
Ok, but it's got to be called something! Perhaps we can call it
"terrorist power". The pols will do something then! ;-)

Seriously, perhaps there is a way of showing the wasted power in
the network and how to resolve it (not free), rather than
generating (certainly not free) and transmitting (no one cares,
but *should*) more.

--
Keith
 
In article <Io_Kb.125403$JW3.65999@twister.nyroc.rr.com>,
daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com says...
"Keith R. Williams" <krw@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a63df869880ac1998aa6b@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <oj4v+tAOlR+$EwCo@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Ross Mac <this.is.a.mung@e
xample.invalid> wrote (in <yo0Kb.597415$0v4.23524771@bgtnsc04-news.ops.w
orldnet.att.net>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Sun, 4 Jan
2004:

Since power is measured by the meter, when the power factor is
corrected,
would there not be a savings of power ???

The ordinary rotating disc meters measure real power only. They do not
measure 'reactive power', which is badly named anyway.

You prefer "imaginary" power? My brother, an engineer in the
power biz, *hates* that term (though it is real ;-). The media
(thus politicians) can't grasp the concept of the "imaginary", so
cannot spend money on the problem. According to him, the August
debacle wouldn't have happened if the power companies could
control the 'j'. ...it's not like "imaginary" power is free
either!


That's why some political oriented papers are calling for requirements on
'voltage support' and 'voltage regulation'. With deregulation here in NY,
independent generators don't *want* to carry MVARS, but *somebody* has to.
A whole other rate structure and pricing setup for open bidding of 'voltage
services'?? With all the same kinds of 'day-ahead pricing' and related
stuff.
Click to expand...
I talked with him about the system discussed here (perhaps it you
your story) about an old coal-fired plant using it's obsolete
generators as synchronous capacitors. His answer was "Who wants
to pay to maintain "generators" that don't". The politicians
cannot understand!
"You shall live in interesting times."
Click to expand...
The curse of the ages.

--
Keith
 
In article <W6Yw4pAKaI$$Ew9l@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that daestrom <daestrom@NO_SPAM
_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote (in <Io_Kb.125403$JW3.65999@twister.nyroc.rr.co
m>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

That's why some political oriented papers are calling for requirements on
'voltage support' and 'voltage regulation'. With deregulation here in NY,
independent generators don't *want* to carry MVARS, but *somebody* has to.
A whole other rate structure and pricing setup for open bidding of 'voltage
services'?? With all the same kinds of 'day-ahead pricing' and related
stuff.

Independent control of reactive current could be VERY bad news for
system stability.
Click to expand...
Power systems a obviously above this microprocessor developer's
expertise, but why wouldn't point-source current control work?
I'm all ears here! ...or are you saying the problem isn't
manageable at all?

--
Keith
 
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
<krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a669adeab3c983498aa8d@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

Ok, but it's got to be called something! Perhaps we can call it
"terrorist power". The pols will do something then! ;-)
Click to expand...
'Wasting power', 'anti-productive power'?, 'ineffective power'?
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
 
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
<krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a669c8b86c0234c98aa8f@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

Power systems a obviously above this microprocessor developer's
expertise, but why wouldn't point-source current control work?
I'm all ears here! ...or are you saying the problem isn't
manageable at all?
Click to expand...
I certainly don't claim to be an expert, but power systems including
generators have complex dynamic characteristics. Oscillation with
various degrees of damping, both above and below critical, are certainly
possible. Generators can appear as inductors or capacitors, according to
the level of excitation, and can lose synch. Making a power-factor
correction at one point can precipitate a crisis elsewhere.

The problem easily becomes unmanageable, as we saw last year, in USA,
Italy and London, England. These are not the only major outages in
living memory, NE USA and SE England have had major incidents in the
past, caused by relatively minor trigger events.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
 
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 06:41:57 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a669adeab3c983498aa8d@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

Ok, but it's got to be called something! Perhaps we can call it
"terrorist power". The pols will do something then! ;-)

'Wasting power', 'anti-productive power'?, 'ineffective power'?
Click to expand...
Just drop the word power and call it Mvars, or coin a new word that
looks more pronounceable, and call it emvars.

Peter Dettmann
 
In article <78grvvkge0nvvh256gei7mlaevkgragt0r@4ax.com>,
peter@aardvark.net.au says...
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 06:41:57 +0000, John Woodgate
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a669adeab3c983498aa8d@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

Ok, but it's got to be called something! Perhaps we can call it
"terrorist power". The pols will do something then! ;-)

'Wasting power', 'anti-productive power'?, 'ineffective power'?

Just drop the word power and call it Mvars, or coin a new word that
looks more pronounceable, and call it emvars.
Click to expand...

Well, the idea is to show that significant energy is being
*wasted* and that it may cost some money to save money (and all
that other green stuff). The suggestions so far say that the
*power company* is at fault for generating this "wasting power".
AIUI, it's largely a transmission problem and not generation.
It's counter-intuitive for people to believe that "phantom
power" eats up "real" power in the transmission system.
Remember, we don't want to spend anything on transmission, since
it doesn't "do" anything. This problem is far beyond the 30sec
sound-bites the six-o-clock news gives it. It's this not
interesting to politicians. Perhaps if the *entire* system were
privatized (rather than the lip-service given to generation),
such that the transmission companies could *invest* in solutions.

--
Keith
 
In article <m5bMIdAHnb$$EwrC@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a669c8b86c0234c98aa8f@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

Power systems a obviously above this microprocessor developer's
expertise, but why wouldn't point-source current control work?
I'm all ears here! ...or are you saying the problem isn't
manageable at all?

I certainly don't claim to be an expert, but power systems including
generators have complex dynamic characteristics. Oscillation with
various degrees of damping, both above and below critical, are certainly
possible. Generators can appear as inductors or capacitors, according to
the level of excitation, and can lose synch. Making a power-factor
correction at one point can precipitate a crisis elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was thinking about the synchronous capacitors talked
about here a few months ago. They aren't free, but seem to be a
good idea to limit the "waste current". ;-) However, I can see
that there are some rather long time-constants with such
mechanical beasts (as with generators), so control of a large
system may be chaotic, thus not be possible under all
circumstances. I guess the only solution is to fight the NIMBYs,
force the generation into their back yard, and shrink the grids
to something more manageable. DC interconnect would seem to help
here (transfer power, but not the uncontrolled phase problem).

The problem easily becomes unmanageable, as we saw last year, in USA,
Italy and London, England. These are not the only major outages in
living memory, NE USA and SE England have had major incidents in the
past, caused by relatively minor trigger events.
Click to expand...
Sme of these were caused by sheer stupidity, as the '67(?) NE
blackout. Sure, mistakes propagate fast in unstable systems, but
I believe the larger problem here was the lack of local
generation. Once the critical path blew, there was no chance to
anything other than disaster.

--
Keith
 
"Economic Systems" <ninguna@123mail.cl> wrote in message
news:bt578b$3fofj$5@ID-174448.news.uni-berlin.de...
Hi friends:

I've developed an economizer of electrical energy for home o industrial
use, this device causes to the electric meter that no indication is
displayed o consumtion, there is very people has armed this system and
applying it
The web site with details for the assembly of this device is in:

http://members.fortunecity.com/chileno4/Ecoe.htm

Any question will be answered throught of the email indicated in that web
site, or writte to this mails deleting WITHOUT_THIS.

gigawattgratisWITHOUT_THIS@123mail.cl

jarayamWITHOUT_THIS@latinmail.com

Thanks, bye.

Johnny
Click to expand...
Even though I am not the original poster here I would like to thank all the
posters for I learned a few things here I was not aware of...thanks
again....Ross
 
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
<krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a67d14da9b5b08498aa97@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Thu, 8 Jan 2004:

Well, the idea is to show that significant energy is being
*wasted* and that it may cost some money to save money (and all
that other green stuff). The suggestions so far say that the
*power company* is at fault for generating this "wasting power".
Click to expand...
I don't agree that they do say that, but in any case, what is your
suggestion for a new term?

AIUI, it's largely a transmission problem and not generation.
It's counter-intuitive for people to believe that "phantom
power"
Click to expand...
That term is already used for something else.

eats up "real" power in the transmission system.
Remember, we don't want to spend anything on transmission, since
it doesn't "do" anything. This problem is far beyond the 30sec
sound-bites the six-o-clock news gives it. It's this not
interesting to politicians. Perhaps if the *entire* system were
privatized (rather than the lip-service given to generation),
such that the transmission companies could *invest* in solutions.
Click to expand...
In UK, we have complete privatization, but with a 'Regulator',
independent of government, who has power to prevent abuses, such as
unjustified price increases or failure to maintain a reliable supply.
The effect is to seriously restrict the type of investment that you
propose.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
 
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
<krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a67d2fd6df25e8198aa98@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Thu, 8 Jan 2004:

I guess the only solution is to fight the NIMBYs,
force the generation into their back yard, and shrink the grids
to something more manageable.
Click to expand...
Embedded generation is not all good news. It increases the fault level
(prospective fault current or MVA), which means the network may well
need to be reinforced (a thicker grade of damp string).

DC interconnect would seem to help
here (transfer power, but not the uncontrolled phase problem).
Click to expand...
Yes, but the up-front cost is not negligible.
[snip]

Sme of these were caused by sheer stupidity, as the '67(?) NE
blackout.
Click to expand...
But I think they all began with small, and not unusual faults or
mistakes, that happened to be critical under the circumstances.

Sure, mistakes propagate fast in unstable systems, but
I believe the larger problem here was the lack of local
generation. Once the critical path blew, there was no chance to
anything other than disaster.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the physical dimensions of the network are almost
irrelevant. In other words, a large network with 500 generators behaves
very similarly to a small one with 500 generators. There is less
transmission-line capacitance in the smaller network, but there may be
more capacitance elsewhere.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
 
"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
news:W6Yw4pAKaI$$Ew9l@jmwa.demon.co.uk...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that daestrom <daestrom@NO_SPAM
_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote (in <Io_Kb.125403$JW3.65999@twister.nyroc.rr.co
m>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

That's why some political oriented papers are calling for requirements on
'voltage support' and 'voltage regulation'. With deregulation here in
NY,
independent generators don't *want* to carry MVARS, but *somebody* has
to.
A whole other rate structure and pricing setup for open bidding of
'voltage
services'?? With all the same kinds of 'day-ahead pricing' and related
stuff.

Independent control of reactive current could be VERY bad news for
system stability.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean by 'independent control of reactive current'.

Current operations in many areas have the ISO or load dispatcher controlling
the switching on/off of capacitor banks in large substations (both manually
and automatic). But they also order generator units to take on specific
MVAR loading. Partly to ensure the stability of the generator-to-load
transmission lines, partly to augment MVAR loads to control voltage ranges.

So reactive current on many lines *is* controlled independent of 'real'.
But with deregulation, there isn't much incentive for generating companies
to 'generate MVARS'. Such 'voltage support services' are not very
lucrative, and was only a secondary consideration. Although crucial to
sustaining the integrity of the grid, it wasn't given much consideration
when passing deregulation legislation.

daestrom
 
"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
news:a0TTLfBkLm$$Ew8a@jmwa.demon.co.uk...
-snip-
Unfortunately, the physical dimensions of the network are almost
irrelevant. In other words, a large network with 500 generators
behaves
very similarly to a small one with 500 generators. There is less
transmission-line capacitance in the smaller network, but there may be
more capacitance elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Longer physical dimensions present more of a problem with VAR flow and
voltage support. Long lines don't carry VAR's well.. Voltage drop for
VAR's will be in phase with the system voltage rather than nearly in
quadniture when carrying Watts. This means that a lines capacity to
carry VARs is only a fraction of the ability to carry real power. This
means that unless there is a VAR source at the load end, the line can't
carry the load. The source end also will have to deal with the
capacitive load of the line, and if the line is lightly loaded, this can
become a major issue.

Matthew
 
"Jim Ghrist" <utec_remove@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:NzdKb.11406$Pn5.8250@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
The input to the rectifier, full-wave or half-wave, is ac not dc. The
output is dc. If you use a rectifier, then an inverter, the metered power
will be higher because of losses in the rectifier/inverter. You could,
however, add a battery and some circuitry and have power for a period of
time if the power goes off. You might even be able to patent the device
and
sell it -- I would suggest a name like "Uninterruptible Power Supply" or
UPS
for short. Or has someone already thought of this? ;-)
Click to expand...

Yeah, but my question was about using half the wave with a current limit,
to get DC 40% duty cycle, through the meter, so that the meter records
less power usage.
 
"Keith R. Williams" <krw@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a669adeab3c983498aa8d@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <L3NnrQAYJl+$EwGZ@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a63df869880ac1998aa6b@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Mon, 5 Jan 2004:
In article <oj4v+tAOlR+$EwCo@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Ross Mac
this.is.a.mung@e
xample.invalid> wrote (in
yo0Kb.597415$0v4.23524771@bgtnsc04-news.ops.w
orldnet.att.net>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Sun, 4
Jan
2004:

Since power is measured by the meter, when the power factor is
corrected,
would there not be a savings of power ???

The ordinary rotating disc meters measure real power only. They do
not
measure 'reactive power', which is badly named anyway.

You prefer "imaginary" power? My brother, an engineer in the
power biz, *hates* that term (though it is real ;-). The media
(thus politicians) can't grasp the concept of the "imaginary", so
cannot spend money on the problem. According to him, the August
debacle wouldn't have happened if the power companies could
control the 'j'. ...it's not like "imaginary" power is free
either!

No, I can see the problems with 'imaginary', which is also a poor name
by itself. Both words, 'reactive' and 'power' are misleading to non-
technical people. I don't have a suggestion for a better name that I
feel is good enough to withstand the inevitable challenges.

Ok, but it's got to be called something! Perhaps we can call it
"terrorist power". The pols will do something then! ;-)

Seriously, perhaps there is a way of showing the wasted power in
Click to expand...
Its NOT WASTED !

Reactive power includes an imaginary component that is truely imaginary.

Maybe the better word is "imaginarily increased power". or "peak volts peak
amps power".. the power you get when you use peak voltage and peak amps to
calculate power.


Eg The actual power is 10 kW, the 'reactive power' is 14 kW, then there is
4kW * time in second joules of imaginary power, and its perfectly imaginary
because there was no transfer of those joules from supply to consumer !


Large factories arent allowed to have bad PF because they would burn out
transformers and things "faster" (or "more often" , as the case may be) ,
and causes a problem with quality of supply to other consumers (and the
rest of the plant)
 
"Keith R. Williams" <krw@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a67d2fd6df25e8198aa98@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <m5bMIdAHnb$$EwrC@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Keith R. Williams
krw@attglobal.net> wrote (in <MPG.1a669c8b86c0234c98aa8f@enews.newsguy.
com>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Wed, 7 Jan 2004:

Power systems a obviously above this microprocessor developer's
expertise, but why wouldn't point-source current control work?
I'm all ears here! ...or are you saying the problem isn't
manageable at all?

I certainly don't claim to be an expert, but power systems including
generators have complex dynamic characteristics. Oscillation with
various degrees of damping, both above and below critical, are certainly
possible. Generators can appear as inductors or capacitors, according to
the level of excitation, and can lose synch. Making a power-factor
correction at one point can precipitate a crisis elsewhere.

Yeah, I was thinking about the synchronous capacitors talked
about here a few months ago. They aren't free, but seem to be a
good idea to limit the "waste current". ;-) However, I can see
that there are some rather long time-constants with such
mechanical beasts (as with generators), so control of a large
system may be chaotic, thus not be possible under all
circumstances. I guess the only solution is to fight the NIMBYs,
force the generation into their back yard, and shrink the grids
to something more manageable. DC interconnect would seem to help
here (transfer power, but not the uncontrolled phase problem).
Click to expand...

Quit blaming power factor for blackouts.

The blackouts are caused by overload , for which the cure is load shedding.











The problem easily becomes unmanageable, as we saw last year, in USA,
Italy and London, England. These are not the only major outages in
living memory, NE USA and SE England have had major incidents in the
past, caused by relatively minor trigger events.

Sme of these were caused by sheer stupidity, as the '67(?) NE
blackout. Sure, mistakes propagate fast in unstable systems, but
I believe the larger problem here was the lack of local
generation. Once the critical path blew, there was no chance to
anything other than disaster.
Click to expand...
The west coast of the USA had a similar blackout, same cause as the recent
NE USA blackout.

--
Keith
Click to expand...
 
"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
news:3$Io5dAP2d+$Ewhr@jmwa.demon.co.uk...
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Peter
peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote (in <3ff9b10a.4475945@news.paradise.ne
t.nz>) about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Mon, 5 Jan 2004:

I have never figured how it was done (I must ask one of the old timers
from that utility),

You use a low-voltage, heavy current transformer to drive a current
backwards through the current coil of the meter. But modern meters won't
let you drive the disc backwards, and there are BIG sparks when you
connect it, anyway, so if your consumption appears to suddenly decrease,
the utility people look for the resulting burn marks on the meter tails.
Click to expand...

Even a university EE graduate could figure out a way to avoid the sparks.
 
I read in sci.engr.electrical.compliance that Leon.
<noemail@noemail.noemail.com> wrote (in <3fffee5b@news.rivernet.com.au>)
about 'Electric Energy Economizer !!', on Sat, 10 Jan 2004:
Reactive power includes an imaginary component that is truely imaginary.

Maybe the better word is "imaginarily increased power". or "peak volts peak
amps power".. the power you get when you use peak voltage and peak amps to
calculate power.


Eg The actual power is 10 kW, the 'reactive power' is 14 kW, then there is
4kW * time in second joules of imaginary power, and its perfectly imaginary
because there was no transfer of those joules from supply to consumer !


Large factories arent allowed to have bad PF because they would burn out
transformers and things "faster" (or "more often" , as the case may be) ,
and causes a problem with quality of supply to other consumers (and the
rest of the plant)
Click to expand...
Which goes to show that you shouldn't believe everything you read on
newsgroups.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top