One small correction in the figure given at 6:10, the +/- sign are according the the AC voltage waveform applied to the inductor, which is "positive" in half cycle and "negative" in other half, and the current flow due to this waveform is represented by arrows. The direction of arrows are according the current waveform which is "negative" in first 1/4 cycle, "positive" in next 1/4 cycle, again positive in next 1/4 cycle, and negative in last 1/4 cycle. By mistake, I placed the direction of arrows opposite to what it really should be. So just assume the upward arrows to be downward, and downward arrows to be upward.
Hi Vijay, actually it is shifted on x-axis after inverting it because of the (-phi) in -cos(2*omega*t - phi). So if you shift it back then you can see that it is inverted, let me know if it clarifies.
Yes, but you can also say it simpler. Both Capacitors and coils will save energy. But when you have AC curent, the current will not only save energy, but give away energy( Current ) . For example an electrical motor where you have no load. Then the cos(phi) is small. Lets say 0,05 or 0,1- This means that 5 or 10% of the total available energy is used to turn the rotor. The rest of the energy is going back to the net. If you turn up the load so the cos(phi) is 0,9 then 90% of the energy is used and only 10% is going back to the source/net. Reactive power is ping pong energy. Going both ways, because a coil will be charged and discharged.
Thanks for watching the video thoroughly and adding the point to the discussion. I also tried to explain the same statement, however, I felt that just stating this fact will not be enough as we (especially electrical engineers) are reading this statement since 1st year of our graduation but still have not thought about it in depth. So I intended to tell the same story with a bit of different perceptive and a flavor of mathematics. (About keeping it simple, I was not up for analogies for this concept because I don't feel analogies can do justice to reactive power)
One small correction in the figure given at 6:10, the +/- sign are according the the AC voltage waveform applied to the inductor, which is "positive" in half cycle and "negative" in other half, and the current flow due to this waveform is represented by arrows. The direction of arrows are according the current waveform which is "negative" in first 1/4 cycle, "positive" in next 1/4 cycle, again positive in next 1/4 cycle, and negative in last 1/4 cycle. By mistake, I placed the direction of arrows opposite to what it really should be. So just assume the upward arrows to be downward, and downward arrows to be upward.
After 2 years, this video has finally helped me get round my head much better now, the concept of reactive power. Thank you for this.
Hi @Batman😉, Glad to hear that my videos are helping superheroes😄
Sir at 4:15 the graph illustrating -cos(2wt-ø) is not inverted can you explain is it a print mistake or I am wrong
Hi Vijay, actually it is shifted on x-axis after inverting it because of the (-phi) in -cos(2*omega*t - phi). So if you shift it back then you can see that it is inverted, let me know if it clarifies.
Yes, but you can also say it simpler. Both Capacitors and coils will save energy. But when you have AC curent, the current will not only save energy, but give away energy( Current ) . For example an electrical motor where you have no load. Then the cos(phi) is small. Lets say 0,05 or 0,1- This means that 5 or 10% of the total available energy is used to turn the rotor. The rest of the energy is going back to the net. If you turn up the load so the cos(phi) is 0,9 then 90% of the energy is used and only 10% is going back to the source/net. Reactive power is ping pong energy. Going both ways, because a coil will be charged and discharged.
Thanks for watching the video thoroughly and adding the point to the discussion. I also tried to explain the same statement, however, I felt that just stating this fact will not be enough as we (especially electrical engineers) are reading this statement since 1st year of our graduation but still have not thought about it in depth. So I intended to tell the same story with a bit of different perceptive and a flavor of mathematics. (About keeping it simple, I was not up for analogies for this concept because I don't feel analogies can do justice to reactive power)
Nice
👍👍 very nice
Nice 👍👍
Thank you :)
👍👍👍
👍👍👍👌
🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰
P
👍👍👍