Volt Amps = ??

[Phil Allison]

"James" <j.l@octa4.net.au>

snip snip snip

If so - get outta here.


......... Phil


G'day Mates, Happy new year to everyone first up

Phil - please be nice to people,

** There are no "people" here - just egos with keyboards.

personal insults are unprofessional to say the least ...

** I agree - so I react strongly against them.

and you are un doing some of the good advice you give.

** No point in me giving good advice when there are countless fuckwits
here undoing it all.



............ Phil

 

[David]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 19:38:54 +1100, Tony Pearce wrote:

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff50120$0$18752$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"David" <no_way@hotmail.com> wrote in message
newsan.2004.01.02.05.24.32.906000@hotmail.com...
Please provide a reference to back up this figure.

** Open your eyes wanker - or have you already completed the job.

This is Phil's way of saying you are right David, but he has never owned an
air conditioner, let alone know anything about them!
Better not discuss the inverter types and reason for soft start circuits
etc.

TonyP.

I know! Thanks Tony.

David

 

[Phil Allison]

"David" <no_way@hotmail.com>

I know! Thanks Tony.

** Tony is a fake name - it belongs to a fake and a monstrous liar.

You and Tony make a fine pair - of arseholes.





........... Phil

 

[Kevin Ettery]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff4c606$0$18693$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Kevin Ettery" <kpettery@dcsi.net.au
Guys,

I AM an Electrical Engineer and do know a bit about this subject.


** Shame you are not an electronics engineer - then you might just get
it
right.

Phil,

My degree is a Bachelor of Engineering (Electrical/Electronic) - what's your
qualification? Also I have practical working experience with the systems I
described in my email.

Real Power (what provides the apparent power output) in an ac circuit is
given by:
P =VI cos theta
where theta is the angle between the current and the voltage.
and the product VI is called the VOLT-AMPS (written as VA).
cos theta is the power factor.


** Tell me Kevin - in the EE game, is the phrase "ac circuit" code
speak
for something ? Is is code speak for those systems where voltages and
current waveforms are all sinusoidal ???????????

If so - get outta here.

Phil, I used the term "ac circuit" so my email would be comprensible to the
majority of people reading it - "ac systems" is the more correct term. And
it is not a game, its a profession.

Also, in ac systems the waveforms are very rarely pure 50 Hz sinusoids,
however almost any waveform can be very closely approximated by the summing
a fundamental and various harmonics of suitable magnitudes, using Fourier
analysis (even a square wave can be approximated so). If you are not aware
of this then you are not really in a position

I mentioned power factors as I deal with these every day in my work, and
because they're fairly simple to explain.

I only described the steady-state conditions (normal running conditions), as
dealing with non-steady-state conditions (ie switching transients, fault
behaviour) is fairly specialised and difficult to describe in comprehensible
layman terms. I have experience with such non-steady-state conditions as
one of my jobs, for a few years, was in power system protection which, among
other things, required analysis of the fault response of three phase
systems - 3phase faults, phase to phase faults and phase to ground faults.

Regards




Kevin

 

[Phil Allison]

"Kevin Ettery" <

"Phil Allison" <...

Guys,

I AM an Electrical Engineer and do know a bit about this subject.

** Shame you are not an electronics engineer - then you might just
get
it right.

Phil,

My degree is a Bachelor of Engineering (Electrical/Electronic) - what's
your
qualification? Also I have practical working experience with the systems
I
described in my email.

** But still you are unaware that Power Factor is simply Watts divided by
VA ???

And that VA is simply rms Volts multiplied by rms Amps ????

** Tell me Kevin - in the EE game, is the phrase "ac circuit" code
speak for something ? Is is code speak for those systems where voltages
and
current waveforms are all sinusoidal ???????????

If so - get outta here.


Phil, I used the term "ac circuit" so my email would be comprensible to
the
majority of people reading it - "ac systems" is the more correct term.

** A rose by any name .......

But you did not answer my question.

And it is not a game, its a profession.

** Yawn.

Also, in ac systems the waveforms are very rarely pure 50 Hz sinusoids,

** Still wondering if "ac systems" includes ones with non sinewave
currents ??

Hmmmmmm, have patience Phil.

however almost any waveform can be very closely approximated by the
summing
a fundamental and various harmonics of suitable magnitudes, using Fourier
analysis (even a square wave can be approximated so). If you are not
aware
of this then you are not really in a position

** Cripes - now he drags old Fourier out of his grave !!!!

A good mathematician never dies ........

I mentioned power factors as I deal with these every day in my work, and
because they're fairly simple to explain.

** But you got the explanation wrong - considering this is an
***electronics*** NG.

I only described the steady-state conditions (normal running conditions),
as
dealing with non-steady-state conditions (ie switching transients, fault
behaviour) is fairly specialised and difficult to describe in
comprehensible
layman terms.

** What about non sine loads ??????


I have experience with such non-steady-state conditions as

one of my jobs, for a few years, was in power system protection which,
among
other things, required analysis of the fault response of three phase
systems - 3phase faults, phase to phase faults and phase to ground faults.

** Snore ......



.......... Phil

 

[Tony Pearce]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff56a26$0$18752$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

You and Tony make a fine pair - of arseholes.

This is Phil's way of admitting he cannot refute the argument so must attack
the poster, where he has much more experience than any other Usenet poster.

*Words of wisdom. : Never argue with Phil A, he will drag the argument down
to personal abuse, then beat you with his greater experience.
*With apologies to Dilbert

TonyP.

 

[Phil Allison]

"roverT"

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff56a26$0$18752$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
You and Tony make a fine pair - of arseholes.

This is Phil's way of admitting he cannot refute the argument ....

** More lies, all lies, nothing but lies......

This guy is store window dresser - hes like to fondle the mannequins.




......... Phil

 

[Kevin Ettery]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff62588$0$18748$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Kevin Ettery"

"Phil Allison" <...

Guys,

I AM an Electrical Engineer and do know a bit about this subject.

** Shame you are not an electronics engineer - then you might just
get
it right.

Phil,

My degree is a Bachelor of Engineering (Electrical/Electronic) - what's
your
qualification? Also I have practical working experience with the
systems
I
described in my email.


** But still you are unaware that Power Factor is simply Watts divided by
VA ???

And that VA is simply rms Volts multiplied by rms Amps ????

Duh!! Hardly surprising that PF = watts/VA, cosidering that the calculation
for Watts is VA multiplied by Cos theta (which is the power factor). Any
Year 7 maths student could do that formula juggling.

** Tell me Kevin - in the EE game, is the phrase "ac circuit" code
speak for something ? Is is code speak for those systems where
voltages
and
current waveforms are all sinusoidal ???????????

If so - get outta here.


Phil, I used the term "ac circuit" so my email would be comprensible to
the
majority of people reading it - "ac systems" is the more correct term.

** A rose by any name .......

But you did not answer my question.

And it is not a game, its a profession.


** Yawn.


Also, in ac systems the waveforms are very rarely pure 50 Hz sinusoids,


** Still wondering if "ac systems" includes ones with non sinewave
currents ??

Hmmmmmm, have patience Phil.


however almost any waveform can be very closely approximated by the
summing
a fundamental and various harmonics of suitable magnitudes, using
Fourier
analysis (even a square wave can be approximated so). If you are not
aware
of this then you are not really in a position

** Cripes - now he drags old Fourier out of his grave !!!!

A good mathematician never dies ........

What do you think harmonic analysers use when calculating harmonic
components - they use Fourier analysis, not black magic.

I mentioned power factors as I deal with these every day in my work, and
because they're fairly simple to explain.

** But you got the explanation wrong - considering this is an
***electronics*** NG.

Pray tell what did I get wrong with my explanation?

I only described the steady-state conditions (normal running
conditions),
as
dealing with non-steady-state conditions (ie switching transients, fault
behaviour) is fairly specialised and difficult to describe in
comprehensible
layman terms.

** What about non sine loads ??????

Non-sine ! What do you mean by 'Non-sine'. I suspect what you're referring
to are non-linear loads (inductive and capacitive loads are actually linear
loads). They're a whole level of complexity higher - I'd have to brush up
on the descriptions of these systems since its been a few years since I've
had to deal with them.

I have experience with such non-steady-state conditions as
one of my jobs, for a few years, was in power system protection which,
among
other things, required analysis of the fault response of three phase
systems - 3phase faults, phase to phase faults and phase to ground
faults.

** Snore ......

At least I understand fault calculations Phil. Do you.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Kevin Ettery" <

"Phil Allison"

** But still you are unaware that Power Factor is simply Watts divided
by
VA ???

And that VA is simply rms Volts multiplied by rms Amps ????


Duh!! Hardly surprising that PF = watts/VA, considering that the
calculation
for Watts is VA multiplied by Cos theta (which is the power factor).

** You are still wrong: Watts = VA times PF.

No angles involved - see.

I mentioned power factors as I deal with these every day in my work,
and
because they're fairly simple to explain.

** But you got the explanation wrong - considering this is an
***electronics*** NG.

Pray tell what did I get wrong with my explanation?

** I have told you already.

** What about non sine loads ??????

Non-sine ! What do you mean by 'Non-sine'. I suspect what you're
referring
to are non-linear loads...

** Yes.

I have experience with such non-steady-state conditions as
one of my jobs, for a few years, was in power system protection which,
among other things, required analysis of the fault response of three
phase
systems - 3phase faults, phase to phase faults and phase to ground
faults.

** Snore ......

At least I understand fault calculations Phil. Do you.

** Go annoy the folk on "aus.electrical.pedants" - not me you wanker.




.......... Phil

 

[David]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 00:20:20 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:

"Kevin Ettery"

"Phil Allison"


** But still you are unaware that Power Factor is simply Watts divided
by
VA ???

And that VA is simply rms Volts multiplied by rms Amps ????


Duh!! Hardly surprising that PF = watts/VA, considering that the
calculation
for Watts is VA multiplied by Cos theta (which is the power factor).


** You are still wrong: Watts = VA times PF.

No angles involved - see.



I mentioned power factors as I deal with these every day in my work,
and
because they're fairly simple to explain.

** But you got the explanation wrong - considering this is an
***electronics*** NG.

Pray tell what did I get wrong with my explanation?


** I have told you already.



** What about non sine loads ??????

Non-sine ! What do you mean by 'Non-sine'. I suspect what you're
referring
to are non-linear loads...

** Yes.



I have experience with such non-steady-state conditions as
one of my jobs, for a few years, was in power system protection which,
among other things, required analysis of the fault response of three
phase
systems - 3phase faults, phase to phase faults and phase to ground
faults.

** Snore ......

At least I understand fault calculations Phil. Do you.



** Go annoy the folk on "aus.electrical.pedants" - not me you wanker.

Kevin, This is Phil's way of saying he has no idea what a fault
calculation is and why it is important, yet alone how to do them.

David

 

[Phil Allison]

"David" <no_way@hotmail.com>

Kevin, This is Phil's way of saying he has no idea what a fault
calculation is and why it is important, yet alone how to do them.

** The issue is not relevant to the topic - it is a complete red
herring.

Funny how many red-herrings are produced by bloated toad fish.



......... Phil

 

[Tony Pearce]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff66e9f$0$18391$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

This guy is store window dresser - hes like to fondle the
mannequins.

** More lies, all lies, nothing but lies......

It's Phil who likes his blow up dolls

TonyP.

 

[David]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 00:20:20 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:

"Kevin Ettery"

"Phil Allison"


** But still you are unaware that Power Factor is simply Watts divided
by
VA ???

And that VA is simply rms Volts multiplied by rms Amps ????


Duh!! Hardly surprising that PF = watts/VA, considering that the
calculation
for Watts is VA multiplied by Cos theta (which is the power factor).


** You are still wrong: Watts = VA times PF.

No angles involved - see.

The angle in the power factor, as Kevin has stated. If the voltage and
current waveforms are in phase, then regardless of the waveform, the power
factor will be unity. There HAS to be a phase difference between the
voltage and current waveform for their to be reactive power, and thus a
power factor of less than one.


David

 

[Phil Allison]

"David" <no_way@hotmail.com

The angle in the power factor, as Kevin has stated. If the voltage and
current waveforms are in phase, then regardless of the waveform, the power
factor will be unity.

** Wrong - you are totally wrong.

There is no reference to phase angle in the general definition of PF.


There HAS to be a phase difference between the

voltage and current waveform for their to be reactive power,

** There is no reference to "'reactive power" in the general definition of
PF.

A non unity power factor exists whenever the current waveform does not
follow the voltage waveform - though they may be exactly in phase. This is
the case with typical electronic devices where current is drawn only at AC
voltage peaks. Such loads have PFs of around 0.5.

How many times do I have to say it.




........ Phil

 

[Vermin]

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:43:38 +1100, "Tony Pearce"
<Tonyp@optus.net.com.au> wrote:

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff66e9f$0$18391$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
This guy is store window dresser - hes like to fondle the
mannequins.

** More lies, all lies, nothing but lies......

It's Phil who likes his blow up dolls

TonyP.

Please don't feed the troll Tony.

I've got Pill killfiltered but unfortunately I still get to see his
antisocial ramblings when others get sucked into his "little mind"
games.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Vermin" <Vermin@nowhere.com>

Please don't feed the troll Tony.

I've got Pill killfiltered but unfortunately I still get to see his
antisocial ramblings when others get sucked into his "little mind"
games.

** Look what is talking and what it calls itself.

Look at what it is talking to as well.




........... Phil

 

[Kevin Ettery]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff8aa78$0$18749$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"David" <no_way@hotmail.com

The angle in the power factor, as Kevin has stated. If the voltage and
current waveforms are in phase, then regardless of the waveform, the
power
factor will be unity.


** Wrong - you are totally wrong.

There is no reference to phase angle in the general definition of PF.


There HAS to be a phase difference between the
voltage and current waveform for their to be reactive power,


** There is no reference to "'reactive power" in the general definition
of
PF.

A non unity power factor exists whenever the current waveform does not
follow the voltage waveform - though they may be exactly in phase. This
is
the case with typical electronic devices where current is drawn only at AC
voltage peaks. Such loads have PFs of around 0.5.

How many times do I have to say it.

Phil,

Repetition does not make it so.

Your description "a non unity power factor exists whenever the current
waveform does not follow the voltage waveform - though they may be exactly
in phase" sounds more like the dscription of a factor called a Form Factor
(FF). This is usually relevant to thyristor (SCRs, Triacs, etc.) circuits,
but could be applied to circuits with similar functions.

For a description and definition of power factor I refer the learned
gentleman to the following book:
"Schaum's Outline Series - Theory and Problems of Electric Circuits" (the
edition I have is written by Joseph A. Edminster). It is a fairly simple
and straight-forward text and devotes an entire chapter to power and power
factor (it was one of my second year Degree texts).

Also can you please advise what "typical electronic devices" only draw
current at AC voltage peaks (unloaded full wave rectifiers are the only
things I'm aware of that do this).

BTW loads with a PF of 0.5 are seriously inductive wouldn't you agree? Most
transformers are between 0.8 and 0.95 (some of the toroidals push to about
0.98).




Kevin

 

[Phil Allison]

"Kevin Ettery" <kpettery@dcsi.net.au

Repetition does not make it so.

** You are ignoring facts and the formulae.


( snip irrelevant stuff )

Also can you please advise what "typical electronic devices" only draw
current at AC voltage peaks (unloaded full wave rectifiers are the only
things I'm aware of that do this).

** All of them - excepting only ones that have "active power factor
correction". The vast majority draw current in pulses of about 2 mS
duration 100 times per second. Pulses have a higher rms value than a sine
wave which inflates the VA figure over the watts consumed - hence the poor
PF figure.

BTW loads with a PF of 0.5 are seriously inductive wouldn't you agree?

** There are none so blind as those who will not see - and pompous damn
fools like you.



............ Phil

 

[Kevin Ettery]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ff956cc$0$18387$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Kevin Ettery" <kpettery@dcsi.net.au



Repetition does not make it so.


** You are ignoring facts and the formulae.

I was just curious about your source of facts and formulae.

( snip irrelevant stuff )

Of course you're going to ship a reference that contradicts what you say

Also can you please advise what "typical electronic devices" only draw
current at AC voltage peaks (unloaded full wave rectifiers are the only
things I'm aware of that do this).


** All of them - excepting only ones that have "active power factor
correction". The vast majority draw current in pulses of about 2 mS
duration 100 times per second. Pulses have a higher rms value than a sine
wave which inflates the VA figure over the watts consumed - hence the
poor
PF figure.

100 times a second (which sounds like twice the 50Hz ac supply frequency)
and drawing current for 2mS. Sounds like we are talking about a full wave
rectifier with moderately large smoothing capacitors - those parameters you
describe sound about right for this type of rectifier. It appears the
values you are using to calculate what you call PF are ac input volts, ac
input current and dc output power.

And for this sort of circuit phase angles, leading or lagging, are not
relevant as they apply only to ac circuits, not this which is essentially a
dc circuit with a little 100Hz ripple.

You should have indicated at the start of this thread that you were
discussing rectifiers and dc circuits. Now that I have it in the correct
context I can see what your comments referred to. What misled me is that
you referred to Power Factor - what you refer to as Power Factor is a power
in Vs power out ratio akin to efficiency. I think my texts call it a Power
Efficiency Ratio [PER], but I'd have to do a bit of looking as its been a
while since I had to refer to this field, and particularly these
parameters - its pertinent if you're designing rectifiers, but most of my
work has just been using them.

BTW loads with a PF of 0.5 are seriously inductive wouldn't you agree?

** There are none so blind as those who will not see - and pompous damn
fools like you.

In an ac circuit a Power Factor of 0.5 is seriously inductive. In an
essentially dc circuit what you are calling Power Factor is not related to
inductance or capacitance at all (once the initial transients settle down).


And Phil, based on some of the comments directed to others on this group,
you're obviously speaking from first-hand knowledge of pompous fools.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Kevin Ettery" <

"Phil Allison"

Repetition does not make it so.


** You are ignoring facts and the formulae.


I was just curious about your source of facts and formulae.

** So PF = watts / VA is a mystery to you ???

( snip irrelevant stuff )

Of course you're going to ship a reference that contradicts what you say

** It was irrelevant - same as all your points.

Also can you please advise what "typical electronic devices" only draw
current at AC voltage peaks (unloaded full wave rectifiers are the
only
things I'm aware of that do this).


** All of them - excepting only ones that have "active power factor
correction". The vast majority draw current in pulses of about 2 mS
duration 100 times per second. Pulses have a higher rms value than a
sine
wave which inflates the VA figure over the watts consumed - hence the
poor PF figure.

100 times a second (which sounds like twice the 50Hz ac supply frequency)
and drawing current for 2mS. Sounds like we are talking about a full wave
rectifier with moderately large smoothing capacitors - those parameters
you
describe sound about right for this type of rectifier. It appears the
values you are using to calculate what you call PF are ac input volts, ac
input current and dc output power.

** Only one figure needs measurement.

The rms current draw from the AC supply.

One just needs a "true rms" amp meter.

You should have indicated at the start of this thread that you were
discussing rectifiers and dc circuits.

** What do you imagine the load presented by an electronic device is ??

What is the title of this newsgroup ????

I mentioned AC to DC conversion and current draw only during voltage
peaks several times.

Now that I have it in the correct context I can see what your comments
referred to.

** You are getting further away - not closer.

BTW loads with a PF of 0.5 are seriously inductive wouldn't you agree?

** There are none so blind as those who will not see - and pompous
damn
fools like you.


In an ac circuit a Power Factor of 0.5 is seriously inductive.

** All you do is repeat endlessly your stupid one eyed view of PF.

PF = watts / VA ........ there is no phase angle to be seen
!!!!!!!!

And Phil, based on some of the comments directed to others on this group,
you're obviously speaking from first-hand knowledge of pompous fools.

** Usenet is full of them - you are one of thousands talking on a
topic you have NOT got the first clue about.



............ Phil