Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
From: D.C. Cox [SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 1998 12:32 AM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
It appears Tesla was accutely aware of the effects of coupling energy into
unwanted areas --- many of his Col Springs photographs illustrate his coils
on relatively high insulated wooden platforms.
> From: Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 1998 2:45 PM
> To: Tesla List
> Subject: Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
> Hi Jim,
> > From: Jim Monte [SMTP:JDM95003-at-UCONNVM.UCONN.EDU]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 11:46 AM
> > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > Subject: Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
> > >From: John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> > >Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 2:17 AM
> > >To: Tesla List
> > >Subject: Re: Voltage/Length (fwd)
> > >
> > < big snip >
> > > Note that energy and power transfer between the pri and sec circuits
> > >always 100 percent (Skilling). This is easily understood. The transfer
> > >induction and there are no losses in inductive reactance. Also, there
> > >equations for losses in inductive or capacitive reactances. The coil
> > >resistance losses and the capacitor dissipation losses are all Ohms
> > >reactive) losses.
> > Unfortunately, any loss is still a loss and will reduce total energy
> > available to do other things. Talking about "reactive losses",
> > how about energy lost to stray coupling to other objects? For
> > example, has anyone looked into losses due to coupling of the
> > primary to a good earth ground as a function of primary distance
> > above ground? Is this negligible?
> You are quite right. It is not negligible. You can easily measure a
> change in Q if you move a good primary further away from the floor.
> Your note on the losses is appreciated. I have tried to make the same
> point on other occasions.