[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Secondary Theory (Was Bipolar Coil)-Heretical view
An addendum to part of an earlier post of mine:
<snip>
> My friend and I are working through their calculations to arrive
> at a design methodology from their standpoint. The going is not easy
> and made even less easy in that I have no worked example from them.
> I am told that there is a worked example in the Tube Coils handbook
> of which I don't have a copy. In the papers I have seen, page after
> page is devoted to analysing resonators etc. retrospectively which is
> not a great help if one wants to design them from scratch. Other
> difficulties include:
> - an equation for loss resistance which gives unrealistically high
> ESRs for real coils that in practice appear far better when measured
> using sound measuring techniques
Did something just go "ding"? I just realized that the equation in
question was formulated for 1/4 wave antennas that are supposed to
"lose" power, not for high Q resonators :( Yes??
> - they resort in the end to the use of the lumped L and C parameters
> which anybody who uses our list "recipe" approach loves (because they
> actually work well in practice and we can unerringly calculate them,
> even if they are wrong for various subtle reasons). I cannot
> understand why people who claim these things are wrong resort to
> using them like this. Perhaps I've misunderstood them and done them a
> grave injustice. Time (and experiment) will tell.
I think it might be happening right now.
Malcolm