RE: Mutual Inductance & K Factor

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

Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com>


Malcolm -

I have found that saying something is impossible on the List is risky
business because someone will surely prove you wrong. However, when it comes
to engineering design I find that it is sometimes very difficult if not
impossible to represent the real world using anything but empirical
equations backed up with data from actual tests. Even this may not be
possible and only the effects of the real world on the parameters can be
determined.

Predicting the capacitance of a particular terminal and resonator in space
is apparently possible and Paul N. has done it with Beowulf methods as Terry
pointed out to me in his post on this subject. It is obvious that the List
consists of very learned and capable members like Paul so the average coiler
like me should be careful about saying that something is impossible.

John Couture

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 6:57 AM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: RE: Mutual Inductance & K Factor


Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
<m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>

Hi John,

On 21 Mar 2002, at 22:06, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com>
>
>
> Malcolm -
>
> Do you know of any computer programs that finds the toroid capacitance
when
> placed on the TC secondary at the design stage  other than Terry's ETesla6
> program?

No I don't. I am obviously unfamiliar with all the programs which
must be in existence - I imagine there must be some whose authors are
not even on the list. The nub of my argument is not about whether a
program currently exists or not but what can or cannot be done. I
don't think it's unreasonable to say that predicting what the
capacitance of a particular structure (i.e. combined terminal and
resonator) is possible. Etesla6 may be the best formulation currently
in existence and if does the job perfectly, there is no more to be
done. If it doesn't, then there must be a better way. I don't think
it's unreasonable to say that.
    I realize that in the real world of resonators operating closish
to the ground etc. there will be a myriad of variables at work which,
if not taken into account, will introduce errors into the result.
That is to be expected. I just don't think this is an intractible
problem, even if others do.

Even Terry's program requires inputs that can be only guestimates.
> Here again it is impossible to come to any conclusion about a TC program
> because there is not enough test data available to verify what the program
> is producing.
>
> However, after the TC is built the actual toroid capacitance can be found
by
> tests and with the JHCTES or similar program. The unknowns are still
> unknowns but their effects on the Tc operating frequency become known.
This
> frequency is then used with the program to find the true toroid
capacitance.
> It should be noted that this can only be done with programs that are the
> automatic tuning type because several parameters are involved that must be
> coordinated.
>
> The 15 to 25% reduction is based on my limited tests. I agree that this
> reduction could be much greater when the top load conditions varied from
> those that existed when I made the tests.
>
> John Couture

I admit to disliking the word "impossible" unless a formal proof of
something's impossibility exists.

Regards,
malcolm