Voltage/Length -> reactive losses

To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 08:38:51 -0600
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net


----------
From:  D.C. Cox [SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent:  Friday, January 30, 1998 12:32 AM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: Voltage/Length -> reactive losses

to: Malcolm

It appears Tesla was accutely aware of the effects of coupling energy into
unwanted areas --- many of his Col Springs photographs illustrate his coils
on relatively high insulated wooden platforms.

DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net


> 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>
>