[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
-
To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla@pupman.com>
-
Subject: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
-
From: Tesla List <tesla@stic.net>
-
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:11:55 -0600
-
Approved: tesla@stic.net
----------
From: Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM@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@UCONNVM.UCONN.EDU]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 11:46 AM
> To: tesla@pupman.com
> Subject: Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
>
>
> >From: John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh@worldnet.att.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 is
> >always 100 percent (Skilling). This is easily understood. The transfer is by
> >induction and there are no losses in inductive reactance. Also, there are no
> >equations for losses in inductive or capacitive reactances. The coil
> >resistance losses and the capacitor dissipation losses are all Ohms law (not
> >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.
Malcolm
<snip>