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

# Re: Rewrite of Mutual Inductance Laws for Tesla List

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

Hi Harvey,

On 16 May 2002, at 8:06, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "harvey norris by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <harvich-at-yahoo-dot-com>
>
> The laws of Mutual Inductance for air core coils only
> implies a several percentage points effeiciency;
> TRANSLATION; 100 REACTIVE WATTS IN- 5 WATTS REACTIVE
> WATTS OUT

Which laws are those? In fact you can get k pretty close to 1 if the
coils have very similar geometries. If there are few losses, even if
k is quite low, transfer efficiency is demonstrably high. I have
measured an energy transfer efficiency approaching 90% between two
coupled air-cored coils with k set to about 0.15.

> However those laws only specify L1L2 in air core, and
> with increased frequency of input for L1L2 coils if we
> give each of these L quantities an associated C1 and
> C2 values, we should expect the mutual induction to
> increase, or more properly the ability of the L1C1
> primary to excite the L2C2 secondary for comparisons
> here.

I confess I don't understand any of this. M is a function of k and
the inductances of the two coils. I don't see where capacitance comes
into it.

> http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/teslafy/files/RI/Dsc00184.jpg
> L1 =10.8 mh, C1 =14 uf
> L2= 60 henry, C2= 1 nf
>
> Input = 1.67 volts *.35 A = .58 VAR
> Output=(4/3.16*1000)*.004A = 5.06 VAR
>
> Since the volt-ampereres measurements only indicate
> possible deviations from actual real power input, when
> it it is shown that the components are actually
> matched to be as completely resonant as possible, the
> reactive power arguments completely fail to show how
> the the output coils appear to be greater than the
> input.

The reactive power in the output circuit is the result of an
accumulation of energy in that circuit isn't it?

> The simple statement of the fact is that the
> unenergized field of this 7 pole face rotor -at- 480 hz
> can produce only 1.67 volts enabling .35 A on the 14
> gauge coil in DSR1 resonance, but >1250 volts to light
> a one ended neon leakage current across the 1 nf
> capacity occurs on the secondary side. When the field
> is actually energized the output side does get reduced
> according to the increased neon leakage current.
>
> 15 Volt Operation
> http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/teslafy/files/RI/Dsc00178.jpg
>
> In that operation there having over 6000 volts across
> the caps,experimentation suggests that all three
> voltage lines of conduction making that high voltage
> can be cut from its supply source, and instead THE
> SAME LEVEL OF VOLTAGE BY DSR1 INDUCTION ALONE WILL
> APPEAR!
>
> Pray tell us what is the K mutual inductance factor
> here in this coefficient by calculations here? The
> ordinary L1L2 mutual inducatnce equations do not
> account for the increased efficiency afforded by
> giving each L quantity a C to resonate with the
> imposed frequency.

But there is a fundamental difference between two mutually coupled
inductances and two mutually coupled tuned circuits. A tuned circuit
is not called a "tank" for nothing. The old sum of energy out =
energy in minus losses must apply. Energy accumulation in a tank
takes place *over time*, something which voltmeters and ammeters do
not take into account with their sluggish responses. You can of
course see such acccumulation occurring on an oscilloscope since that
instrument does use a *timebase*.

> Indeed here is an alternator with no energized field
> exercizing resonance of L1C1 through space to L2C2 and
> producing one ended neon discharge! So to complain at
> least to science law makers of presumptions it can be
> said that air core mutual inductance laws do not
> preclude a non performance factor.

Fundamentally, the only difference between air-cored and material-
cored coils if the material is not driven close to saturation is the
higher permeability (hence L of the coils, hence M between them). Is
there something here that I'm missing?

Regards,
malcolm

HDN
>
> =====
> Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
> http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/teslafy/
>
>
>
>

```