You are welcome and from what you said to Daestrom, you have it right.
--
Don Kelly @shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
----------------------------
"jclause" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
>
>
> In article <_C9Re.48407$Hk.7212@pd7tw1no>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>>-----------
>>Daestrom has it right.
>>
>>The fact that we have inductance (as in a motor) or capacitance means that
>>there is energy being stored and then returned to the source at a
>>different
>>part of the cycle. [Draw a voltage wave and a current wave with the
>>current
>>out of phase with the voltage. Plot the product at each instant of time.
>>This gives the instantaneous power. The result will be a constant term
>>plus
>>a sinusoidal term. The constant term is the real (average)power and the
>>sinusoidal component has a zero average. The "reactive power" is a measure
>>of the magnitude of the 0 average component which shuttles from source to
>>load and back] This shuttling of energy has nothing to do with the net
>>real
>>power (which is generally considered as the average over a cycle)
>>delivered
>>as its average is 0 over a cycle.
>>
>>Reactive "power" is NOT dissipated in resistance and is NOT real
>>(average
>>as that is what we are dealing with in general power seen by the source.
>>
>> However, there is an associated component of current (e.g. at 0.8 pf, the
>>current will be 1.25 times the current at 1.0pf for the same power) which
>>increases circuit loss and (if inductive) voltage drops in the circuit. In
>>that way, the reactive component does increase real power dissipation in
>>line resistance but it is not correct to say that the reactive "power" is
>>dissipated in the line resistance. The utility generator sees the effects
>>of
>>reactive as well as real power but the turbine driving the generator sees
>>only the real component and in a motor, only the real component (less real
>>losses) is converted to mechanical energy.
>>--
>>
>>Don Kelly @shawcross.ca
>>remove the X to answer
>
>
> Thanks Don. You're right in there with the good technical stuff
> as usual.
>
> JC
>
>