Andre J.

Jaberi
Lab: #01
Human Powered Generator
ECE 3072 - L01
September 18th, 2019
Lab #1 Andre J. Jaberi Page 2 of 6

Procedures:
 STEP 1:
A resistance of 0.393 was measured as the stator resistance of the DC motor.

 STEP 2:
Below is a table showing the recorded current and voltages from the data acquisition
system, for 4V to 24V.

Table 1: Current, Voltage, and Speed measurements of a DC motor no-load test.

Current (A) Voltage (V) Speed (rpm)
4V 0.824 4.127 620
8V 1.013 8.358 1205
12 V 1.188 12.35 1886
16 V 1.216 16.42 2562
20 V 1.167 20.26 3196
24 V 1.220 24.54 3839

 STEP 3:
For this step, no figures were collected.

 STEP 4:
For this step, no figures were collected.

 STEP 5:
The bicycle was petaled with no load, and the 100W lightbulb was turned on as a load.
Regrettably, the current capturing aspects of the oscilloscope was not functioning
properly, and we were instructed that there was no need to capture the waveform as it
was not mentioned in the lab handout. However, the average voltage before was
measured to be 14.8 V, and the voltage after was 5.6 V.

 STEP 6
Load tests began with a 100W light bulb as the initial load. Beginning by pedaling
slowly, then increasing to three additional speeds, output voltages and currents were
recorded.

Table 2. Current, voltage and speed measured with a 100W load

Current (A) Voltage (V) Speed (rpm)
Speed 1 5.43 6.01 1150
Speed 2 4.39 7.10 1200
Speed 3 4.69 8.42 1400
Speed 4 6.68 13.71 2500
Lab #1 Andre J. Jaberi Page 3 of 6

 STEP 7:
The previous step was repeated with two lightbulbs for a 200W load, and again with 3 for
a 300W load.

Table 3. Current, voltage and speed measured with a 200W load

Current (A) Voltage (V) Speed (rpm)
Speed 1 3.32 5.73 1150
Speed 2 4.39 7.10 1200
Speed 3 4.69 8.42 1400
Speed 4 6.68 13.71 2500

Table 4. Current, voltage and speed measured with a 300W load

Current (A) Voltage (V) Speed (rpm)
Speed 1 8.25 6.00 1100
Speed 2 10.36 7.53 1500
Speed 3 11.30 9.05 1800
Speed 4 13.01 12.00 2800

 STEP 8:
The final step of this lab included adjusting the scales on the oscilloscope to handle long-
term measurements. For a time span of 100 seconds, the voltage was recorded and
averaged. The oscilloscope used would only allow half the waveform to appear at a time
due to such scaling restraints. Also, like in step 5, the current aspects were not
functioning. The average voltage was 7.526 V, and the current determined by the monitor
in the bike was 10.21 A.

Figure 1. Oscilloscope output displaying voltage for half of 100 seconds of pedaling the bicycle..
Lab #1 Andre J. Jaberi Page 4 of 6

Questions:
1. Vt = Ea + IaRa  Ea = Vt - IaRa
Speed was converted from rpm to rad/sec  (RPM Speed) * (2 * pi / 60)

Back-emf vs. Mechanical Speed

30

25
Back-emf (V)

20
y = 0.0597x
15 R² = 0.9992
10

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Mechanical Speed (rad/sec)

Figure 2. Plot of Back-emf vs Mechanical Speed. The slope of the line represents the speed constant.

𝐸𝑎 = 𝐾𝑎 Φ𝜔𝑚
𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 = 𝑆𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = 𝐾𝑎 Φ = 0.0597

2. Te = 𝐾𝑎 ΦIa

Electromagnetic Torque vs. Mechanical Speed

0.009
Electromagnetic Torque (N*m)

0.008
0.007
0.006
0.005 y = 6E-06x + 0.0052
0.004 R² = 0.6997
0.003
0.002
0.001
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Mechanical Speed (rad/sec)

Figure 3. Plot of Electromagnetic Torque vs. Mechanical Speed. The slope of the graph represents the friction constant, and the
y-intercept represents the stray torque.
Lab #1 Andre J. Jaberi Page 5 of 6

𝑇𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑦 = 𝑦 − 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 = 0.0516 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚

𝐵 = 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = 6 ∗ 10−5 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚 ∗ 𝑠𝑒𝑐

3. The voltage readings include

𝐸𝑎 = 14.8 𝑉
𝑉𝑡 = 5.6 𝑉
𝐼𝑎 = 𝑈𝑛𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑤𝑛 𝑑𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑂𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒 𝑁𝑜𝑡 𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔
For the sake of the calculation we will assume Ia to be 10.00A

𝑉𝑡 = 𝐸𝑎 − 𝐼𝑎 𝑅𝑎

(𝑉𝑡 − 𝐸𝑎 ) 14.8 𝑉 − 5.6 𝑉

𝑅𝑎 = = = 0.92 Ω
𝐼𝑎 10.00 𝐴

4. Table of calculated values for experimental data from Steps 6 and 7. Many calculations were
based on values determined in the questions prior.

Table 5. Tabulated Calculations Necessary to Determining Efficiency

Ia (A) V (V) Speed (rpm) wm (rad/sec) Ea (V) Te (N * m) Pra (W) Pfriction (W) Pstray (W) Ploss (W) Pout (W) Pin (W) Efficiency
100W Load
Speed 1 5.43 6.01 1150.00 120.42 7.19 0.07 27.13 0.87 6.21 34.21 32.63 66.84 0.49
Speed 2 4.39 7.10 1200.00 125.66 7.50 0.07 17.73 0.95 6.48 25.16 31.17 56.33 0.55
Speed 3 4.69 8.42 1400.00 146.60 8.75 0.07 20.24 1.29 7.56 29.09 39.49 68.58 0.58
Speed 4 6.68 13.71 2500.00 261.79 15.63 0.07 41.05 4.11 13.51 58.67 91.58 150.26 0.61
200W Load
Speed 1 3.32 5.73 1150.00 120.42 7.19 0.07 10.14 0.87 6.21 17.22 19.02 36.25 0.52
Speed 2 4.39 7.10 1200.00 125.66 7.50 0.07 17.73 0.95 6.48 25.16 31.17 56.33 0.55
Speed 3 4.69 8.42 1400.00 146.60 8.75 0.07 20.24 1.29 7.56 29.09 39.49 68.58 0.58
Speed 4 6.68 13.71 2500.00 261.79 15.63 0.07 41.05 4.11 13.51 58.67 91.58 150.26 0.61
300W Load
Speed 1 8.25 6.00 1100.00 115.19 6.88 0.06 62.62 0.80 5.94 69.36 49.50 118.86 0.42
Speed 2 10.36 7.53 1500.00 157.08 9.38 0.07 98.74 1.48 8.11 108.33 78.01 186.34 0.42
Speed 3 11.30 9.05 1800.00 188.49 11.25 0.07 117.47 2.13 9.73 129.33 102.27 231.60 0.44
Speed 4 13.01 12.00 2800.00 293.21 17.50 0.08 155.72 5.16 15.13 176.01 156.12 332.13 0.47



There is more power lost due to the resistance as a result of the larger loads. This is a direct result of the
current being much higher for the experiments with 300W loads, regardless of the voltage and speed
staying relatively similar. Likewise, the addition of components in parallel with original ones increases
the power lost from friction.
5. 𝑃𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 𝑉𝐼 = (7.526 𝑉)(10.21 𝐴) = 76.84 𝑊
𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑉𝐼 = (~12 𝑉)(10 𝐴) = 120 𝑊
The maximum current is unknown because the oscilloscope current function was not working.
100
𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = (76.84 𝑊) ( ℎ) = 2.13 𝑊 ∗ ℎ
3600

I believe a person could produce around, or a little over, 20 W·h prior to becoming too fatigued.
Lab #1 Andre J. Jaberi Page 6 of 6

I am unable to plot power output vs time because I do not have a time series for current due to the
instrument being broken.
6.
There are multiple voltage limiters and regulators that are widely available. They rely on
the use of capacitors to store extra charge, and also use op-amps to ensure steady output. These
can account for drops below a threshold voltage or limit the amount of power being outputted at
once. However, it is important to note that these will decrease efficiency even more as power
would be dissipated even more through each additional component.
It is also worth mentioning that a permanent magnet DC generator could have a regulated
output voltage by using an intermediate rechargeable battery. For example, as one petals, the
battery is charged and in turn releases a constant output voltage. Again, however, this would have
associated inefficiencies.
A standard 500 megawatt coal power plant produces 3.5 billion kWh per year, which is
enough energy to power 4 million light bulbs all year. If we were to then This is equivalent to
about 9.6 billion watts per day. That scale is near incomparable to what many humans would be
able to produce. However, if we were to consider a set of 100 individuals, pedaling at the
estimated 20 W * h of energy (from question 5), for 24 hours a day for an entire year, they would
produce about 17.5 million Wh annually. The carbon footprint of something like this would be so
negligible it is uncalculatable given the scale of what a coal power plant produces.
At the rate of production, from my calculated power average, it would take 1000/76.84 or
about 13 hours to produce 1 kWh. This is cost would equate to nearly $100 per kWh which is
much much greater than the average price in Georgia. There would be no way to compete with
existing technologies.