RE: Effective Resistance

["John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)]

Bart -

What I tried to point out is that ESR has two answers, Rac and Reff. In the
past coilers have used both categories of calculations for ESR and always
end up with different answers and wonder why. Like is the Q factor 100 or
900? The Rac calculation is standardized but the Reff calculation has too
many unknowns to produce explicit answers at the design stage. It is obvious
that this situation must be taken into consideration when developing a TC
computer program.

John Couture

-----------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 10:34 AM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Effective Resistance


Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>

Hi John,

<snip>
>
> > I believe that referring to the AC resistances as above will avoid the
> > confusion that can arise when discussing Tesla coil circuitry.
> >
> > John Couture



Obviously, this paragraph tells why you chose to mention using Rac, but I
don't
quite agree. I think what is confusing is using Rac because the total ESR
effects the performance of our coils and therefore, understanding the
individual elements that make up ESR helps to improve the design. I think
Rac
may be a good methodology for use in a program, but people must understand
that
Rac is not the ESR. This only adds to the confusion.

Bart