[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AC wire resistance with proximitry effects



Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Gerry,

Fraga is looking "real". Have you checked your coils predictions with Fraga? I'm showing a Q of 207. My high turn 8.5" coil is showing a Q of 155. If memory serves, that's close to measurement. I'm trying to dig up my misc. Q measurements (scattered via emails, hand written notes, etc.). Anyway, could only get on the internet for a second, but wanted to mention that. I still need to do a lot of verification with the equation and values as I did it rather quickly. But, it certainly ballparked well.

Take care,
Bart

Tesla list wrote:

Original poster: "Gerry  Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Bart,

After looking at the Fraga equation again, it does look and L and C directly. It uses the product of L and C by virtue of the frequency needed for skin depth. Your Les and Ces are the frequency determining equivalents that are suppose to be accurate to like 1%. How accurate are Medhurst C and Wheeler L in predicting the correct frequency. I doubt there will be any significant difference especially since f gets sqrt'd which will cut the error in half.

Gerry R.

Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Also, with Fraga, Gary used Medhurst C and L. I wonder how it plays out with Ces and Les in place of Medhurst? As a matter of fact, I wonder how well a lumped effective L and C would work with all the equations? They probably won't change a great deal (but, I haven't looked at that).

Take care,
Bart