Re: TC efficiency, was Math help...

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>

In a message dated 7/12/01 8:17:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 
writes:

> John, All -
>  
>  Do you or anyone else have tests with calcs to prove that large TC's are
>  more efficient than small ones?
 
>  Normally with electrical devices the larger the more efficient. However,
>  Tesla coils are not normal electrical devices. I believe this is why a 
clear
>  understanding of the differences between magnetic and electric circuits is
>  so important. These two types of circuits are often combined incorrectly
>  when discussing Tesla coils.
>  
>  Efficiency and energy transfer involves losses, Ohms law, etc, in electric
>  circuits. Magnetic circuits have a different set of rules. The energy
>  transfer between the Tesla coil primary and secondary coils is a magnetic
>  circuit transfer and there are no magnetic flux losses. This is Faraday's
>  action or voltage at a distance with no conductors. Electric circuits
>  require conductors. Note that Hertz and Maxwell went way beyond the above
>  concepts using Hertzian waves with no conductors.

John,

My Tesla coils all have conductors :)   along with losses in those
conductors.  You agree that the charging losses are lower in a
large machine.  I would say that the wire losses and other losses
involved with the energy transfer are probably lower too in a larger
TC.  I don't see any reason why the losses would be higher in a
large TC.  I remember you once told of a test you did that showed
larger losses in a large TC, and that's what you're basing your
comments on.  Maybe if you re-post the details of the test, folks
will have some comments about it.  

John Freau
- 
>  
>  John Couture