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

Re: Variable Capacitance and Inductance

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

hi im just a new enthusiast named Bill  but has capacitance been measured in
a farady cage or a room that cancels out all radio frequencies ? i am a
builder and one of the labrotories i had to build for the govnt. had to be
linesd with a special gold containing paint so radio equipment could be
calibrated  ...im just a self taught amature ,,and just got involved in hv
experiments in my free time very recently so pardon any ignorance , but, has
anyone done that ?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 12:47 PM
Subject: RE: Variable Capacitance and Inductance

> Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
> Hi Dave,
> At 01:20 PM 5/23/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hi Terry,
> >
> >>At least one person on this list has proposed to run a test over time to
> >see if there were indeed a variation in inductance in a coil.
> >>Done that ;-)
> >>http://hot-streamer-dot-com/bob/qvar/results/expt8/index.html
> >>Humidity (especially rain) seems to affect surrounding structures
> >great losses.  Temperature affects copper losses directly...
> >
> >I notice your data is for one diurnal cycle.  It would appear from your
> >that not only temperature and humidity accounted for difference, but also
> >the time of day.  In the Q factor chart there was a huge drop around 3am.
> >This is obviously not temperature or humidity related.
> It rained that night on the roof.  100% humidity related ;-))
> >It would appear that
> >your data is affected by other factors in addition to humidity and
> >temperature.  Have you run the same tests with the coils enclosed in
> >temperature and humidity stable containers to compare data?
> Nope, not yet.  We need to get that stuff written up better...
> >
> >Tesla is also saying that the measured capacitance will change over time,
> >regardless of which method of measurement or calculation is used.
> "i" would disagree that a sphere's capacitance inside a metal shell will
> change anymore than a capacitors's value will change for no apparent
> external reason.  If the fields are not affected, the capacitance will not
> be affected.
> >
> >>However, his "law" about elevation was overturned on appeal in the
> >court of better facts. ;-))
> >
> >What are these facts you are referring to?
> The fact that "elevation" alone is not the reason.  A precision shielded
> vacuum capacitor will measure the same value deep in the Earth, on the
> Earth's surface, high in the sky, or in outer space.  "Elevation" is
> not a factor.  You could get the same field change effects moving it
> sideways toward a wall.  Reading Tesla words, I don't think he quite
> understood that at the time he wrote this.  I don't think he "saw" what
> actually happening there.  But he was very close and soon did latter.
> >
> >>Tesla's stated affects of the moon and seasons have to be severely
> >questioned as Paul and I's QVAR experiments show.
> >
> >Your experiments, from what I can see, support Tesla's statements.  Do
> >have a paper somewhere explaining more of the details concerning your
> >experiments?  What exactly were the conditions of the coils and their
> >environment?  Do you have a data log to share?  From what I gather of the
> >results presented, there were no controls to eliminate temperature and
> >humidity.  If your conclusions are correct, then an identical experiment
> >with no variation in temperature or humidity would reveal more or less
> >straight lines.  But just the anomalies at 3am show that something else
> >affecting the coil characteristics.
> Paul and I have not written up a nice report yet.  We were exploring what
> was making the variations but there have been no real controlled tests yet
> to isolate the causes.  There "appears" to be some obvious correlations
> however.  Seasons affect humidity and temperature.  I am pretty
> about the moon ;-))
> >
> >>We also have better equipment nowadays. Before you trust Tesla's data
> >much, read the part about the type of equipment he was using...  Only a
> >genius like him could have gotten that stuff to work at all!!
> >
> >Exactly!  A genius like him _could_ do it.  Our equipment is not better,
> >merely exists.  Tesla had to build his own LC meters.  We buy ours off
> >shelf.  Considering the values Tesla was generating and the degrees of
> >accuracy he was obtaining, his equipment was no worse than ours today.
> I wouldn't give 2 cents for what he was using :-))  I bet he could have
> used a nice storage scope and network analyzer!!
> >Unlike us, Tesla knew what he was looking at.  He could tell, by
> >several different measurements, whether a result was erroneous or not.
> >of us today struggle for want of this type of insight into inductance and
> >capacitance.  We rely on the meters built by others.  Accurate meters in
> >some cases to be sure, but even the best meter is only as accurate as the
> >person using it.  I have seen no evidence anywhere that suggests Tesla's
> >equipment was faulty or substandard to ours based on the measurements he
> >took.  The results of his efforts are testimony to his accuracy.
> Today we can measure in a second what it took him all day to do.  He could
> have gotten a lot more sleep or done other work rather than struggling.
> But, of course, history is there and done now...
> >
> >>BTW - A Tesla coil's measured inductance is different than it's "real
> >inductance" when operating.  This discrepancy was first noted with
> >where "I" had to guess at things.  Paul finally figured it out!
> >
> >You guys deserve a lot of credit for this work.  I have read nearly all
> >Tesla literature, and I haven't yet found any reference to suggest Tesla
> >making this observation.  Perhaps Tesla covers this in his blanket
> >observation that inductance is variable, but he doesn't seem to
> >that the Tesla coil affects its own operating characteristics.  Perhaps
> >someday this will be known as the Fritz/Nicholson Effect?
> Actually, Paul figured that out not me.  I just fudged it when I had to.
> Paul gets the credit for that one!
> Cheers,
> Terry
> >
> >Respectfully,
> >
> >Dave
> >