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

Voltage/Length -> reactive losses


----------
From:  Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent:  Sunday, February 01, 1998 4:44 PM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses

John,
      I trust this enquiry was made tongue-in-cheek?

> From:  John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> Sent:  Friday, January 30, 1998 6:51 PM
> To:  Tesla List
> Subject:  Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
> 
> At 11:11 PM 1/29/98 -0600, you wrote:
> >
> >----------
> >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 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>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 
>   Malcolm, All -
> 
>   Can you give us an example of how you calculate the reactive losses if for
> example the Q varies from 100 to 50?
> 
>   John Couture

As you well know, a pure reactance does not lose power. That is a far 
cry from saying that "all power is transferred from primary to 
secondary because the transfer is by reactive mechanisms"!!

Q - is there a current flowing in the primary wiring while the 
    magnetic field it is producing is changing? 
A - Yes.

Q - So there is an I^2.R loss associated with the primary wiring 
    during this period?
A - Yes.

Q - is there an induced current in the secondary wiring during this 
    period?
A - Yes.

Q - is there an I^2.R loss associated with the secondary wiring 
    during this period?
A - Yes.

Q - is the primary coupled to nothing other than the secondary? 
A - No.

Q - Can you prove this?
A - Yes. I can detect currents flowing in other conductors in 
    proximity to the system. I can also detect E-fields using a 
    meagre scope probe positioned many feet away. My neighbours don't 
    like it either.

Q - So power is being lost *during* the pri-sec transfer?
A - Yes.

Q - So does all primary power reach the secondary?
A - No.

QED.
Malcolm