3DFS's VectorQ Digital Electricity Technology ?

[madires]

The calculation of efficiency is key here. We are using 70-120W of power at all times to correct (bring to full synchonization and balance) of 60kW at all times.

When I load one phase with 60kW then the blue box would have to take 40kW from the other two phases for balancing. Let's do a very simplified calculation. The current would be about 350A (40kW/115V) and a super nice MOSFET with an R_DS_on of 2mOhms would drop about 0.7V (350A * 0.002Ohms). So the MOSFET burns roughly 250W (350A * 0.7V). Surely there are more components the current has to pass through.

[cdoerfler]

The calculation of efficiency is key here. We are using 70-120W of power at all times to correct (bring to full synchonization and balance) of 60kW at all times.

When I load one phase with 60kW then the blue box would have to take 40kW from the other two phases for balancing. Let's do a very simplified calculation. The current would be about 350A (40kW/115V) and a super nice MOSFET with an R_DS_on of 2mOhms would drop about 0.7V (350A * 0.002Ohms). So the MOSFET burns roughly 250W (350A * 0.7V). Surely there are more components the current has to pass through.

That is ridiculous, as I am sure you understand. You lack knowledge of our methods, perhaps it is best to stick to the results.

Maybe this will help.

[madires]

That is ridiculous, as I am sure you understand. You lack knowledge of our methods, perhaps it is best to stick to the results.

No! When I load L1 with 60kW (L1 to N), how does the blue box balance the 60kW across all three phases in a way the grid's three phases are loaded equally with 20kW each?

BTW, if the blue box has an efficiency of 98% and is able to deal with 60kW the inefficiency is 1200W.

[StillTrying]

You lack knowledge of our methods,

Around 50% of your claims are electrically or physically impossible or just nonsense. Most of them are nothing to do with your methods or our understanding of your methods, they're just laws of the universe. It's a very target rich environment.

When you're trying to show which direction the power or current is flowing in wires on a diagram it would help if N and G weren't connected at one of the loads.

The 70-120W INCLUDES the power electronics

A 1cm x 1cm CPU can dissipate 150W with a small heat sink and small fan, no one would have to use water cooling, oil cooling and 2 big fans to dissipate 70-120W.
Why don't you say that is uses only 120W while correcting 60kW worth of power. That would make it's efficiency 120/60,000 = 99.998 %.   99.8 % which is even better!

and the correction is bidirectional.

The current correction is not bidirectional, which is why the current transformer has to go on the supply side of the current correcting connection. Another simpler reason is that it's impossible.

The most illustrative example here is a motor. When the current and voltage are not aligned, a 4 pole motor alternates between motor and generator at each pole. This is the most significant source of motor destruction in the power network.

When the currents and voltages are aligned in the suppliers transformer, the currents and voltages in the motor will still be misaligned, the only way for the currents and voltages to be aligned in a motor is for it to not be a motor.
Your claims that you somehow correct the phase of the current inside motors and make them better is among the most ridiculous, I'm surprised you continue with them. There's at least one other thread on it somewhere.

When there are multiple motors in the same panel, they interact with each other in this harmful way resulting in wear and tear that shortens the life of the motors by years.

That's not all bad, just some.

When SDE is installed in a motor control center for example, all the motors operate at the rated rpm whether loaded or not and since the C&V are always aligned, the motors never experience the fluctuation from generator to motor.

Not true, and Bonkers!

[Yansi]

I am just wandering, why isn't this thread already locked, trashed, and troll blocked?

[cdoerfler]

A 1cm x 1cm CPU can dissipate 150W with a small heat sink and small fan, no one would have to use water cooling, oil cooling and 2 big fans to dissipate 70-120W.
Why don't you say that is uses only 120W while correcting 60kW worth of power. That would make it's efficiency 120/60,000 = 99.998 %.   99.8 % which is even better!

The VectorQ is provides complete surge protection. The fans do not turn on unless a surge comes through.

The current correction is not bidirectional, which is why the current transformer has to go on the supply side of the current correcting connection. Another simpler reason is that it's impossible.

Yes it is. The CTs are measuring the power flow which is inherently bidirectional, The correction absolutely goes both ways.

When the currents and voltages are aligned in the suppliers transformer, the currents and voltages in the motor will still be misaligned, the only way for the currents and voltages to be aligned in a motor is for it to not be a motor. Your claims that you somehow correct the phase of the current inside motors and make them better is among the most ridiculous, I'm surprised you continue with them. There's at least one other thread on it somewhere.

You are wrong here too. Cleaning up the power at the panel like we do delivers the exact amount into the panel that is demanded resulting in the unintelligent loads consuming precisely what they demanded. Loads do not consume more power than they demand unless it is forced to by fluctuating power. I am surprised you do not realize this.

[Gregg]

I am just wandering, why isn't this thread already locked, trashed, and troll blocked?

Although controversial, this thread is entertaining and somewhat educational (if an interested person wants to take the time to look up the claims and arguments presented).  There aren’t very many posts on this forum related to mains and grid AC power.  Power engineering should be near and dear to most electronics enthusiasts because it is the probably the most often used power source for most of us. Plus, it hasn’t really crossed the lines of unacceptability to the point of banning.
It is the batterizer for mains power; note the number of posts this forum had for the batterizer.  Similar to the batterizer there are very loose connections to reality that might look good drawn on the back of a napkin after a couple of pints at the local pub. 
It is also entertaining to observe someone digging themselves into a hole and wondering how deep they get before it all collapses.  The anticipation of if or when a real working model is available helps keep interest even if the odds approach zero of getting real verifiable data from the purveyors of this theoretical device. 

[Cyberdragon]

Of course there's a market in the audiophool trade. It's the next best thing since a copper rod in a box of rocks.

"Complete surge protection" when the wires are thin and it's supposedly going to sink the surge current through it's own supply breakers. If you try to sink current beyond a certain point it would, by the laws of physics, trip it's own breakers. We've been throught this...


"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" -Adam Savage

[StillTrying]

The VectorQ is provides complete surge protection. The fans do not turn on unless a surge comes through.

Its current correcting wires are too thin and inductive for it to do much in the way of surge protection, never mind complete surge protection.

The current correction is not bidirectional, which is why the current transformer has to go on the supply side of the current correcting connection. Another simpler reason is that it's impossible.

Yes it is. The CTs are measuring the power flow which is inherently bidirectional, The correction absolutely goes both ways.

The current corrections and the power direction corrections only apply to the supply side. It's impossible to change the current, or the two way power direction of a load with bad PF on the loads side.

When the currents and voltages are aligned in the suppliers transformer, the currents and voltages in the motor will still be misaligned, the only way for the currents and voltages to be aligned in a motor is for it to not be a motor. Your claims that you somehow correct the phase of the current inside motors and make them better is among the most ridiculous, I'm surprised you continue with them. There's at least one other thread on it somewhere.

You are wrong here too.

I've checked, I'm not!

Details, just in case there's anyone still reading.

The CTs measure the current on the supply side of the current correcting wire, from there they can determine the supply side power and it's direction.

The CTs can't measure anything on the loads side of the correction wire because they're not there.
And nothing can be done with the current or power directions on the load side anyway, because it is the load(s) that determine it.

So the current corrections correct the direction of power flow on the supply side so that the supply power direction is always flowing from the supply.

But the supply side current corrections can't change anything at all on the load side, so can't change any of the 2 way power directions or PF of the loads.
Nothing changes at all on the loads side so it can't fix a motor's PF, or any thing else on the loads side. But it does hide the 2 way power direction fluctuations from the incoming supply.

Cleaning up the power at the panel

It cleans the power on the supply side so that the power's direction there is always from the supply.
But on the load side the two way power fluctuations due to a load's bad PF are still there. So bits like "unintelligent loads consuming precisely what they demanded" and "power fluctuations" are just nonsense.

[madires]

The VectorQ is provides complete surge protection. The fans do not turn on unless a surge comes through.

Its current correcting wires are too thin and inductive for it to do much in the way of surge protection, never mind complete surge protection.

For a proper surge protection the blue box would need to be inline, not detached. Don't 3DFS know such basic stuff?

Yes it is. The CTs are measuring the power flow which is inherently bidirectional, The correction absolutely goes both ways.

The current corrections and the power direction corrections only apply to the supply side. It's impossible to change the current, or the two way power direction of a load with bad PF on the loads side.

By using only current transformers the blue box can't measure any DC component which would be bad for the grid.

[cdoerfler]

I love it when you talk about how this technology cannot do what it absolutely is doing based on your understanding of antiquated technology. 

You are wrong on all accounts. The sensing is the most important part, and yes, it is bidirectional.  Power flow does not magically restart at the panel and by sampling every 6ns for every cycle, SDE is measuring both directions of power flow.

If you attempted to build this box with your limited knowledge, you are pointing out all of the areas where you would fail. Our approach is much different, and therefore the results are much better.

[cdoerfler]

For a proper surge protection the blue box would need to be inline, not detached. Don't 3DFS know such basic stuff?

By "proper" do you mean TVSS that degrade with every strike and does not even let you know how much protection there is?  If that is proper, then keep doing what you are doing. Ignorance is bliss.

SDE relies on the real time computing and intelligent sensing to be able to clean the power and absorb the surges in parallel. This is the advantage of working with data rather than guessing at surge protection. Again, you are applying your standards, which are not applicable here.

By using only current transformers the blue box can't measure any DC component which would be bad for the grid.

This is also not true. We use proprietary flex coil transformers, and have absolutely perfect visibility into the power network. There is nothing that is missed by this method of sensing. In fact, laboratories purchase our Calibri series, which delivers only the measurement without the correction because of the accuracy of data acquisition.

[ebastler]

For a proper surge protection the blue box would need to be inline, not detached. Don't 3DFS know such basic stuff?

SDE relies on the real time computing and intelligent sensing to be able to clean the power and absorb the surges in parallel. This is the advantage of working with data rather than guessing at surge protection. Again, you are applying your standards, which are not applicable here.

Chris, your statements do not make any sense.

The problem with the "detached surge protection" is the inductance and resistance of the long cables. No matter what you do in that magical blue box, it will not be able to protect the wiring from fast high-voltage surges, because most of the surge energy does not even get to your blue box. All your "digital", "software defined", "intelligent sensing" is just smoke and mirrors.

I do not understand why you keep posting here. You are not gaining a shred of credibility here -- every single one of your posts is torn apart by various people, and for very good reasons. It cannot be fun to do this, at least not for you... And if you have the commercial interests of 3DFS in mind, the best you could try and do is to let this thread peter out and hope not too many people find it.

[madires]

For a proper surge protection the blue box would need to be inline, not detached. Don't 3DFS know such basic stuff?

By "proper" do you mean TVSS that degrade with every strike and does not even let you know how much protection there is?  If that is proper, then keep doing what you are doing. Ignorance is bliss.

Exactly! You forgot the wire between the detached blue box and the distribution panel. If you want to suppress surges you need to do it inline with mains for optimal results. As StillTrying already has explained, the wire has inductance for example. The next thing you got wrong are TVSs. MOVs degrade with each surge. TVSs don't degrade as long as you don't exceed their limits.

By using only current transformers the blue box can't measure any DC component which would be bad for the grid.

This is also not true. We use proprietary flex coil transformers, and have absolutely perfect visibility into the power network. There is nothing that is missed by this method of sensing. In fact, laboratories purchase our Calibri series, which delivers only the measurement without the correction because of the accuracy of data acquisition.

Doesn't matter! As long as it's a transformer you can only measure AC, not DC. Also very basic stuff.

Anyway, I have to admit that you convinced me that the blue box is nothing I would buy or recommend to others. If that was your goal, you've succeeded.

[Cerebus]

By using only current transformers the blue box can't measure any DC component which would be bad for the grid.

[[My emphasis]]

This is also not true. We use proprietary flex coil transformers, and have absolutely perfect visibility into the power network. There is nothing that is missed by this method of sensing. In fact, laboratories purchase our Calibri series, which delivers only the measurement without the correction because of the accuracy of data acquisition.

The above is why people here think you have zero credibility. You go around telling people that they don't know what they are talking about and then make a statement like that. Somebody studying electricity in a (high) school physics class (not even college level) ought to know that DC does not make it across a transformer, ought to know that transformers are strictly AC transducers. This isn't a difference of opinion, a difference of perspective or anything like that, you are just plain flat-out wrong - there is no other way of framing it. If you are incapable of getting the very basics right, fundamental laws of physics, why should anybody trust you to discuss more advanced topics?

[madires]

I do not understand why you keep posting here. You are not gaining a shred of credibility here -- every single one of your posts is torn apart by various people, and for very good reasons. It cannot be fun to do this, at least not for you... And if you have the commercial interests of 3DFS in mind, the best you could try and do is to let this thread peter out and hope not too many people find it.

Neither do I. Maybe it's his education in psychology. All I get from this is that 3DFS is the Batteroo for mains. I can imagine that a Fourier based approach might possibly work, but that would involve a lot of processing and a large box without tiny wires.

[ebastler]

Maybe we are underestimating Chris...
https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopherdoerfler/

(I have criticized others for linking to the LinkedIn profile of pseudonymus users before, but since Chris has been open about his 3DFS affiliation I trust this is OK. Chris, if you prefer this link to be removed, please let me know and I will edit the post.)

[cdoerfler]

For a proper surge protection the blue box would need to be inline, not detached. Don't 3DFS know such basic stuff?

SDE relies on the real time computing and intelligent sensing to be able to clean the power and absorb the surges in parallel. This is the advantage of working with data rather than guessing at surge protection. Again, you are applying your standards, which are not applicable here.

Chris, your statements do not make any sense.

The problem with the "detached surge protection" is the inductance and resistance of the long cables. No matter what you do in that magical blue box, it will not be able to protect the wiring from fast high-voltage surges, because most of the surge energy does not even get to your blue box. All your "digital", "software defined", "intelligent sensing" is just smoke and mirrors.

I do not understand why you keep posting here. You are not gaining a shred of credibility here -- every single one of your posts is torn apart by various people, and for very good reasons. It cannot be fun to do this, at least not for you... And if you have the commercial interests of 3DFS in mind, the best you could try and do is to let this thread peter out and hope not too many people find it.

Regarding the inductance and resistance of the cables, that is accounted for, and yes it does provide real time lightning protection through active shunting as demonstrated over and over.

The problem here is that we have internet experts who have never had firsthand experience with this technology, yet have some extensive opinions on it. Since it is grounded in math and science and passed every single third party evaluation, demonstration and test that we have ever done, the only conclusion is that you are all wrong and I am not doing a great job of explaining it.

Regarding the fun, it actually is rather fun for me. Educational too. Engaging with you all has helped me by providing me information that I can follow up on to better understand at the deep levels. As everybody knows here (just not as well as my engineers), electricity is complex and there is a lot to this.

It would be great if this were more of an educational forum, where I could receive serious questions from inquiring minds and if I did not know the answer, I could go get it, but every discussion here devolves into attacks and poking fun, so I play to the audience.

Luckily for me, none of our clients give a shit about this forum, nor would they spend hours perusing the content looking for nuggets of truth etc. Our clients as for proof, which we provide.

It boggles my mind that you all think we have spent a decade building 3DFS and SAM Controllers, which is absolutely revolutionizing compressed air, liquid leveling and water pump control just like 3DFS is revolutionizing power control, and you 3 or 4 are totally blind to the success of our approach, because you would rather remain internet experts. 

[cdoerfler]

I do not understand why you keep posting here. You are not gaining a shred of credibility here -- every single one of your posts is torn apart by various people, and for very good reasons. It cannot be fun to do this, at least not for you... And if you have the commercial interests of 3DFS in mind, the best you could try and do is to let this thread peter out and hope not too many people find it.

Neither do I. Maybe it's his education in psychology. All I get from this is that 3DFS is the Batteroo for mains. I can imagine that a Fourier based approach might possibly work, but that would involve a lot of processing and a large box without tiny wires.

Fourier analysis?!!   That is absurd and obsolete. Impossible to provide accuracy.

This is an example of where our computing method opens up approaches that you are simply not capable of comprehending. This is an example of an educational opportunity, but as you see, you attack me for my psych degree.

I am proud of my knowledge and educational experiences. I had to step way outside my comfort zone to learn this. It touches on real time computing, electrical engineering, power electronics, chemistry and material science, data science, ai, ml, and others. It is genuine innovation and I have a front seat. My psych degree is irrelevant to that.

[cdoerfler]

Maybe we are underestimating Chris...
https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopherdoerfler/

(I have criticized others for linking to the LinkedIn profile of pseudonymus users before, but since Chris has been open about his 3DFS affiliation I trust this is OK. Chris, if you prefer this link to be removed, please let me know and I will edit the post.)

I appreciate your asking, thank you. I am okay with it.

The thing you are all missing is that I am part of a team of technologists. The information will eventually catch up to you all. We are simply way ahead of everybody else, so far ahead that it looks like magic. One day, you will all be grateful for this technology, although you will never accept my approach to communicating this, I grant you that.

[Cyberdragon]

No your invention would violate well established laws of electrical physics that have been studied for about 220 FUCKING YEARS! If you can suddenly bend the laws of physics to your will then where's our lightsabers, cold fusion, open air holograms, ftl travel, forcefields, exc.

And to be clear, we aren't the only ones onto your BS.

https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/an-operating-system-for-electricity.149474/
https://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=187471&page=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/energy/comments/8or7gl/3dfss_software_for_electricity_could_double_the/

[sibeen]

It's a nice thread, and cdoerfler is either bonkers or just a sales person; in many cases it may be hard to tell the difference. My only issue with the thread is that other bits of mis-information is also being included by other users. The two most egregious one's I've spotted are “Backfeeding breakers is also iffy, only certain types allow it” and “For a proper surge protection the blue box would need to be inline, not detached.”

For the first I’ve never seen a breaker that isn’t bi-directional. Some of the more ‘intelligent’ trip units can have reverse power flow detection and such which may trip a breaker if the current flows opposite to that which is expected, but that’s about it.

For the second the vast, vast, vast majority of surge suppression is carried out by a device, whether it be a MOV, SASD, TVSS etc, that is placed in parallel with the incoming line. The feed to the protection device needs to be as short as possible but the device is certainly not put in-line.


My 2 cents worth

[ebastler]

... the vast, vast, vast majority of surge suppression is carried out by a device, whether it be a MOV, SASD, TVSS etc, that is placed in parallel with the incoming line. The feed to the protection device needs to be as short as possible but the device is certainly not put in-line.

I am pretty sure this is what everybody meant when talking about "in-line" surge protection: A protection device that sits in the same box as your main fuses or distribution board, to allow for short, fat connections. That's in contrast to the 3DFS connections to the blue box, which seem to be on the long and flimsy side (photo below). Yes, of course the blue box can short out some surge voltage, but only the part that gets to it...

To put it another way, "in-line" does not mean "in series" (at least to this non-native speaker.  )

[sibeen]

To put it another way, "in-line" does not mean "in series" (at least to this non-native speaker.  )

I can live with that

I also had a thought about the circuit breaker, some RCBO/RCD/ELCB type breakers may also be directional in their current sensing and may also trip if installed 'backwards', but for your general purpose ACB/MCCB/MCB, for those in IEC world, couldn't give a rats about which way they face.

[StillTrying]

By using only current transformers the blue box can't measure any DC component which would be bad for the grid.

This is also not true. We use proprietary flex coil transformers, and have absolutely perfect visibility into the power network. There is nothing that is missed by this method of sensing. In fact, laboratories purchase our Calibri series, which delivers only the measurement without the correction because of the accuracy of data acquisition.

Calibri series is not even a current transformer, and you can't make a coil transformer work down to DC by using faster data acquisition.
I've seen much better logic from an internet bot.