Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Energy saver circuit

R

Robert Baer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi:
Can you tell me how create an energy saver like this:
http://www.electric-saver.com/

Thank you
????? "use a *capacitor* ?????
Lemme see...
1) Waste power to convert AC to DC.
2) Use capacitor to filter these spikes (some power wasted here as well).
3) Waste more energy to convert the DC back to AC.
Did i miss something??
BW, nice looking vacuum cleaner...
 
J

John Tserkezis

Jan 1, 1970
0
Robert said:
????? "use a *capacitor* ?????
Yep.

Lemme see...
1) Waste power to convert AC to DC.
Yep.

2) Use capacitor to filter these spikes (some power wasted here as well).
Yep.

3) Waste more energy to convert the DC back to AC.

Don't need to do that, in fact it DOESN'T do that anyway. (because that
would mean it actually DID something).
Did i miss something??

Yes, you forgot to mention the obvious, and say the magic word "scam".
BW, nice looking vacuum cleaner...

Too small, it's slightly smaller than a pack of cigarettes.

That said, one box will cause you to (eventually) die of lung cancer, the
other will cause suicide when you realise you've been scammed.
 
D

D from BC

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi:
Can you tell me how create an energy saver like this:
http://www.electric-saver.com/

Thank you

I don't know too much about PF correction but I do know:

Stove: Doesn't need power factor correction.
Incandescent lights: Doesn't need PF correction.
Vacuum: Who cares..not on long enough
Computer: Already has PF correction.

Ballast for tube lights: ??
Let's say a ballast has a PF of 0.5.
So 200Watts billed to supply 100Watts.
(If I got that right..)

Does a 90% efficient converter doing power factor correction that
burns 10Watts to deliver 100watts to a ballast result in a power
reduction of 90 watts?

Fridge?


D from BC
 
D

Don Klipstein

Jan 1, 1970
0
I don't know too much about PF correction but I do know:

Stove: Doesn't need power factor correction.
Incandescent lights: Doesn't need PF correction.
Vacuum: Who cares..not on long enough
Computer: Already has PF correction.

Ballast for tube lights: ??
Let's say a ballast has a PF of 0.5.
So 200Watts billed to supply 100Watts.
(If I got that right..)

Does a 90% efficient converter doing power factor correction that
burns 10Watts to deliver 100watts to a ballast result in a power
reduction of 90 watts?

Electric meters only bill for "real" watts, so one does not pay for
extra amps due to poor power factor. Actually, one pays for watts lost in
wiring downstream of the electric meter, but correcting power factor is
unlikely to save more than a couple to occaisionally a few percent there.

Power factor is mainly of concern to commercial and industrial
customers, since power companies do not want to install or add capacity to
carry current that does not translate to billable watts.

Also, most fluorescent fixtures 32 watts or more already have high power
factor.

Power factor of most induction motors is said to be about .8.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])
 
D

D from BC

Jan 1, 1970
0
Electric meters only bill for "real" watts, so one does not pay for
extra amps due to poor power factor. Actually, one pays for watts lost in
wiring downstream of the electric meter, but correcting power factor is
unlikely to save more than a couple to occaisionally a few percent there.

Power factor is mainly of concern to commercial and industrial
customers, since power companies do not want to install or add capacity to
carry current that does not translate to billable watts.

Also, most fluorescent fixtures 32 watts or more already have high power
factor.


Power factor of most induction motors is said to be about .8.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

Gee...so much for trying to defend a PF correction feature. :)
Now that gizmo just looks like a glorified surge suppressor.
I'll take a flying guess at under $5.00 in parts.. :p


D from BC
 
E

ehsjr

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi:
Can you tell me how create an energy saver like this:
http://www.electric-saver.com/

Thank you

Yes. Here's a schematic showing a circuit that, unlike
the thing shown at the url, _will_ save energy, when
properly used:

/
AC ----o o----+
|
[Appliance]
|
AC ------------+

It works for any AC mains powered electrical device.
 
T

Traver

Jan 1, 1970
0
Electric meters only bill for "real" watts, so one does not pay for
extra amps due to poor power factor. Actually, one pays for watts lost in
wiring downstream of the electric meter, but correcting power factor is
unlikely to save more than a couple to occaisionally a few percent there.

Power factor is mainly of concern to commercial and industrial
customers, since power companies do not want to install or add capacity to
carry current that does not translate to billable watts.

Also, most fluorescent fixtures 32 watts or more already have high power
factor.


Power factor of most induction motors is said to be about .8.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I second this response. PFC does not magically save power, it only
smooths out high peak currents to make the load look more resistive
from the power comany's perspective. The power company only cares
about power factor when the customer is drawing huge peak currents.
Peak currents cause loss in their supply wires which is a loss to
their bottom line. That's why power from the power company is supplied
in such high voltages, it reduces the current and therefore the
resistive loss in the wires.

This box is a scam. Passive or active PFCs with any decent power
output have huge components. You would waste more power in the PFC
than you would save in the supply wires in a normal house and like I
said, the power company does not monitor residential customers for bad
power factor.

Traver
 
L

LVMarc

Jan 1, 1970
0
Traver said:
I second this response. PFC does not magically save power, it only
smooths out high peak currents to make the load look more resistive
from the power comany's perspective. The power company only cares
about power factor when the customer is drawing huge peak currents.
Peak currents cause loss in their supply wires which is a loss to
their bottom line. That's why power from the power company is supplied
in such high voltages, it reduces the current and therefore the
resistive loss in the wires.

This box is a scam. Passive or active PFCs with any decent power
output have huge components. You would waste more power in the PFC
than you would save in the supply wires in a normal house and like I
said, the power company does not monitor residential customers for bad
power factor.

Traver


You are all right and there is some energy savings, too! The PF is a
measure of the phase angle of the VI curves.they also provide "insight"
int how much energy is being "wasted" by having a motor ..not operate at
its maximum efficiency point/ as IT UNLIKELY TO HAVE A MATCH SYSTEM FOR
A SINGLE "POINT", THEN you adjust the V I drive to make a system where
the resultant drive waveform when combined with the motor response(s)
offers optimal transducer for the given load"

so it means that often motors are over specsed, compared to their
nominal load, right. so you need right now 2 units of power asd you spec
a motor with 100 units. this lets your mechanical system and some head
room for dynamic effects, over coming startup conditions and extra for
degradation over time, ,

As it works out the PF is a measure of how lightly loaded the motor is,
so you can tell by "looking at the PF" if a V I modfcation can MAKE the
system to an optimum point.

the final basis is now for a given nominal load without the "gadget" you
get the over spedced motor and performance, by definition ...not
optimimzed... then

if you put in basically a "real-time" dynamic load matching device,
obtained via waveform modification..then an optimal system, results by
definition, and therefore for the same nominal load, the power consumed
in an optimized system will be less than an open loop driven system...

sO ITS NO FRAUD AND POSSIBLE. AND EASY TO GET CONFUSED BY DIFFERENT
TERMS USED TO DESCRIBE THE PROCESS.

fOR FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATING YOUR OWN CONTACT A CONSULTANT
THAT KNOWS THIS BUSINESS AND CAN QUICKLY GE YOU WHAT YO NEED!

bEST REGARSS,
mARC pOPEK
 
G

Guy Macon

Jan 1, 1970
0
Traver said:
I second this response. PFC does not magically save power, it only
smooths out high peak currents to make the load look more resistive
from the power comany's perspective. The power company only cares
about power factor when the customer is drawing huge peak currents.
Peak currents cause loss in their supply wires which is a loss to
their bottom line. That's why power from the power company is supplied
in such high voltages, it reduces the current and therefore the
resistive loss in the wires.

This box is a scam. Passive or active PFCs with any decent power
output have huge components. You would waste more power in the PFC
than you would save in the supply wires in a normal house and like I
said, the power company does not monitor residential customers for bad
power factor.

While I share your doubts about the device described at
electric-saver.com, it *is* possible to save energy in the case of
lightly-loaded electric motors without huge components.
For example, see this paper:

The Science Behind the PEC Motor Efficiency Controller
http://www.powerpulse.net/techPaper.php?paperID=142&print

If you look at Figure 9, it becomes apparent that the Nola technique
makes the power factor *worse* while saving energy. It would be
interesting to do the same with a sine wave that changes amplitude,
but it certianly wouldn't be as cheap as the technique described.

Another thing that strikes me about Figure 9 is the fact that it
requires something like a Gate Turn Off Thyristor. I suspect that
pretty much the same effect could be had with the usual zero-
crossing turn off devices.

An escalator is a classic case of a lightly-loaded motor running
many hour per day, which is, no doubt, why it was chosen for the
test results in Figure 10. That being said, the numbers look
about right.
 
G

Guy Macon

Jan 1, 1970
0
LVMarc wrote:

so it means that often motors are over specsed, compared to their
nominal load, right. ....
the final basis is now for a given nominal load without the "gadget" you
get the over spedced motor and performance, by definition ...not
optimimzed... then

if you put in basically a "real-time" dynamic load matching device,
obtained via waveform modification..then an optimal system, results by
definition, and therefore for the same nominal load, the power consumed
in an optimized system will be less than an open loop driven system...
sO ITS NO FRAUD AND POSSIBLE. AND EASY TO GET CONFUSED BY DIFFERENT
TERMS USED TO DESCRIBE THE PROCESS.

fOR FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATING YOUR OWN CONTACT A CONSULTANT
THAT KNOWS THIS BUSINESS AND CAN QUICKLY GE YOU WHAT YO NEED!

bEST REGARSS,
mARC pOPEK

Patent for device described above:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5723966-description.html
United States Patent 5723966
System and method for increasing the efficiency of
alternating current induction motors
Issued on March 3, 1998
Inventors:
Richard Stephen Straka
David Maxwell Coombs
Assignee:
Current Technology, Inc.

Interesting information about Marc Popek:
http://www.fwt.niat.net/Prolific.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=LVMarc
http://www.cer.unlv.edu/personnel.php?sn=popek
http://www.fwt.niat.net/
http://www.fwt.niat.net/AboutFWT.html
 
Top