Talk:Electric generator

message: Do we really need to views of this portable gererator?. Surely one picture is quite adequate.--Light current 16:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I am deleting one. Rex the first 23:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two views? 

message: Wouldn't it be better to use the term engine-generator set or some such term to identify the pictured portable generators, and those described in the Small to medium generators and Large generators sections? Perhaps the small to medium and large generator sections should be combined under the heading Engine-generator sets. A Power station generator section could be used to describe hydro-electric and steam turbine generators. C J Cowie 18:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It probably would, but since most would assume, without ever considering it much, that a generator 1. runs on gas and 2. makes electricity.  Not considering that many other devices and sources of energy can generate electricity.  Your suggested section reorganization sounds good, and let's go with engine-generator.  Not sure what set means, is it a set of devices Engine and generator I usuaily only hear that word when abbreviating generator to genset, anyway... --D0li0 05:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology

message: The list of patents should go - even if you look at them, you won't learn much useful in understanding electric generators. --Wtshymanski 17:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone went to some effort to compile the list and it may be historically interesting, but it doesn't add to this article. Would it make sense to move the relavent entries to the Edison and Tesla articles? --C J Cowie 19:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Patents

message: Maybe some basic conceptual schematics for the basic types of generators should be present (like the Faraday generator or the Dynamo). It would greatly increase the information the article gives with very little extra work —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.76.30.78 (talk • contribs) .
:I was just thinking the same thing.  I plan on adding a basic schematic for a generator with brushless excitation, seeing as that's the type I'm most familiar with. -W0lfie 17:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schematics 

message: A recent editor added text about the Gyro-Gen, a way of using wave power to drive a generator. While this is valuable text, I don't think it belongs in this article because it's really discussion about an interesting prime mover of the generator rather than anything about electrical generators themselves.
Your thoughts?
Atlant 13:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree.  I removed it yesterday.  The same text is in Wave power anyway, so I didn't destroy any information. --Heron 17:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gyro-Gen? 

message: In the section on low power generators, there's a sentence that reads:
: Nevertheless, the maximum efficiency is only around 60% for the best generators - 40% is more typical - due to the use of permanent magnets.
:Can you supply any verification for this?  In A/C generators, the efficiency usually follows power factor.  Most generator designs are set up pretty well.  From my experience, 60% efficiency is not common.  Depending upon the power factor (A/C), you will typically see 70-90% efficiency.  From looking at the meters that were on the motor generators, we were seeing way better than 40-60% efficiency.  You can calculate efficiency by looking at the power needed to drive the generator, and then looking at the voltage and current being supplied to the loads.  Has anyone else here operated motors & generators.  I would like to see what others have to say.Nly8nchz 04:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is wrong as well.  Size does not necessarily mean more efficient.  Larger generators typically create more heat, that is just wasted energy.  You can get more efficiency by adding windings, upping the control field (current) or spinning the generator faster.Nly8nchz 04:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low efficiency?? 

message: Electrostatic generators are used for hi scientific experiments requiring high voltages. Because of the difficulty of insulating machines producing very high voltages, electrostatic generators are made only with low power ratings and are never used for generation of commercially-significant quantities of electric power. Before the connection between magnetism and electricity was discovered, generators used electrostatic principles. The Wimshurst machine used electrostatic induction or "influence". Some electrostatic machines (such as the more modern Van de Graaff generator) uses either of two mechanisms:
Charge transferred from a high-voltage electrode 
Charge created by the triboelectric effect using the separation of two insulators (the belt leaving the lower pulley) 
i don't understand "Electrostatic generators are used for hi scientific experiments requiring high voltages." what is "hi?"
Poiuyt580 20:51, 29 March 
:I would think that these electrostatic generators put out a very high voltage, but the current output levels are very low.  That might be why the power rating is so low.Nly8nchz 04:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  electrical generator question 

message: can someone please explain to me " How does a generator work ? " also help me out on "Tidal generators"
Please also tell me the advantages and disadvantages of wind and tidal generators.
:The tidal generators use the rising and falling of the tide to move an arm in and out of a generator, thus inducing a voltage, and allowing current to flow.  I am not sure which is the armature and which is the stator, but it would be nice for someone to elaborate.Nly8nchz 04:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tidal generators

message: I am on the verge of taking over the dynamo page which is currently just a redirect to here. Another editor does not like the expanded discussion I put on the disambiguation page about the ambiguous meaning of dynamos in the early days of electrical experimentation, so I guess it really belongs as a separate article.
A dynamo is many things, and a generator is just one aspect of its meaning, so it's not really appropriate being integrated into just this article. They say  be bold so here goes..
DMahalko (talk) 01:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynamo should become its own article 

message: "Side view of a large Perkins diesel generator"  is actually a steam locomotive, Union Pacific #4004 to be exact.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.81.99.177 (talk) 03:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Picture 

message: A major part of the electricity generated worldwide is done by using steam turbine drivers ... yet steam turbine drivers are not discussed in this article. The article discusses piston drivers and gas turbine drivers ... but not steam turbine drivers. Why? - mbeychok (talk) 06:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no mention of generators driven by steam turbines? 

message: I would like some help on the following:
I make use of a ventelation fan with the following specifications:
Two fans driven by two 300kw motors moving aproximitly 140 cubic meters of air.
Any suggestions on making use of this to create electricity for other use.
Appreciate any help
regards 
Riaan  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.38.64.208 (talk) 18:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advise on creating electricity 

message: At the begining of the article it states . . . 
 The source of mechanical energy may be a reciprocating or turbine steam engine, water falling through a turbine or waterwheel, an internal combustion engine, a wind turbine, a hand crank, the sun or solar energy, compressed air or any other source of mechanical energy.
The sun or solar energy is not a source of mechanical energy, radiant energy yes but not mechanical.
Must be written by the same idiot who thinks that the sense of time is an other physical sense such as "Taste" or "Hearing".
Note, on that idiot, the sense of time might just very well be another sense like taste or hearing. Time itself is different from the sense of it, just as molecules or sound waves are different from their senses of taste, smell, or "hearing", but the "sense" refers to a psychological phenomenon, which is not tied directly to reality but mediated by the neural circuitry and consciousness. Sound is produced in the brain, not in the mechanical sound waves. what does this have to do with the topic I don't know. Obviously any source of energy (sun or mechanical) may be converted to electric power, and a generator need not be a mechanical generator converting mechanical energy to electrical, although if the term generator is reserved for that, then "converter" might be the more general term. solar cells "generate" electricity from sunlight, and this is not due to mechanical conversion per se (more chemical, but chemistry involves movement of molecules does it not?), however you may want to say that solar cells convert solar energy into electricity, not "generate" it. So it comes down to the definition of generator, and if that is mechanical to electrical, then solar radiation should be removed.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.123.61.105 (talk) 17:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoa. Steady on there.  Remember, we're all bozos on this bus and the fellow who's been teaching the subject to PhDs for 30 years is an exact peer in authority with the 13-year old who watched a special on cable TV last month. Do not taunt happy fun editor.  Why not just clip out the offending text - WP:BOLD and all that. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The revised wording seems to have stuck for five whole days now. More than one editor  has mused about the problems of our editorial model, for example see things like WP:WRONG. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The sun is not a source of mechanical energy. 

message: I have a question about generators. Can an electric motor run a electrical generator and maintain enough power to run the motor?Pdplap (talk) 18:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that would be perpetual motion.   Although modern electric motors and generators are very efficient as energy conversion devices (95-98%), they still lose some energy to friction, resistance of the windings, and core losses, so the generator wouldn't produce enough power to keep the motor running. --ChetvornoTALK 22:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electric Motors and Electrical generators 

message: Tesla has been almost eradicated from the history of electrical generation.  He was the first to recognize the importance of alternating current for power transmission.  His alternators were perhaps the first practical designs.  He also held the original patents.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.248.112.198 (talk) 15:57, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are seemingly biased. Edison is not even mentioned despite him pushing DC. This is about the machines themselves, not who invented them or discovered their waveforms, and there are other designs which dont have their inventors listed either. Charlieb000 (talk) 00:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can this article omit Tesla and his contributions? 

message: : You've extrapolated the specific case (perpendicular movement) to a general case (varying flux). This is correct, but then so was the narrower case beforehand too. As the narrow case (perpendicular movement) is all we need here, then it's the simpler explanation and probably the better text. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed 

message: Photos of large generators doesn't explain working operation.
Suggest using photos/diagrams from  Alternator article.  Someone needs to upload simple diagram . I don't know how to do it. --Ericg33 (talk) 00:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article has no quality diagrams. 

message: The Intro to the History section is just plain wrong. So before electric generators, there were electrostatic generators? Oh, so that's what the Romans and Greeks used then?
Probably should expand that a bit. -- DMahalko (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not clear on what you think is "just plain wrong" in the History section. --ChetvornoTALK 22:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

text: @DMahalko what more I guess it's fine Studytilldeath (talk) 14:21, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History intro section needs work 

message: It mentions the "induction generator", the "linear generator", and the electronic(?) "variable speed constant frequency generators". ...
* I know that the generator found on the small-engine backup-generators that power households do not fit any of these categories (for starters they have brushes and their frequency is dependant on their rotation speed - a permanent magnet type?).
* I did find another manual for a recent "sears craftsman 3000" generator that said in their rotor winding there is only a diode and no brushes. it also features a "AUX winding" that is connected only to a capacitor, didnt disclose where that was however.
so please add at least that brushed one for completeness. I find surprisingly little information about these online. Charlieb000 (talk) 00:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  AC Generator classes 

message: In a stainless steel tank falls crushed coal (rich in gold) and filled with water enriched with silver ions. With the increase of pressure in the tank from the surface of the electrical energy is produced. Diffusion is achieved as raw material and water with water. When heating the liquid gold is increasing. 95.59.78.4 7:48, April 16, 2016 89.33.211.232 16:47, May 5, 2016 (UTC) 95.59.73.185 (talk) 07:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Galvanic electric generator 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Electric generator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151003002335/http://www.mosi.org.uk/collections/explore-the-collections/ferranti-online/timeline.aspx to http://www.mosi.org.uk/collections/explore-the-collections/ferranti-online/timeline.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:32, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified