[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Wet Coils
Original poster: "Jim Lux by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net>
LN2 is a pretty good insulator, and doesn't have much dipole moment, so I'd
expect the dielectric constant to be pretty low (like oil?). The Q would be
quite high, because at 77K, the resistance of the wire will be quite a bit
lower than it is at 300K. Ballparking, a Q improvement of 4, maybe even
Have at it...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: Wet Coils
> Original poster: "Mark Fergerson by way of Terry Fritz
> Tesla list wrote:
> > Original poster: (I have no idea; attributions totally screwed up)
> > Cool! So it appears that gross humidity does not appear to have any or
> > only a tiny affect on inductance. I don't think this test has ever been
> > mentioned before. I am sure the Q dropped like a rock but the
> > held up. "I" didn't think that would be the case. Shows what I know
> Oh, dang. I have the feeling this kills my hope of
> immersing a coil in LN2. Anybody know what parameter of LN2
> I ought to be looking up to determine if it too will drop Q?
> > >>Paul can predict by computer that a lot of the Q variation is due to
> > >resistance changing with temperature
> OTOH the relatively constant temperature of boiling LN2
> will keep Q constant. But at what value?
> > http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tssp/tcma/
> Oh, nice page. "Energy loss budget" is something that's
> been worrying me.
> > ... Been writing web pages all day and burnt now...
> > It is non-TC related but:
> > http://hot-streamer-dot-com/antibubbles/
> > Ouch! Unlike everyone else, the moderator can smack me for sneaking in
> > non-TC stuff ;o))))
> Funny, the page won't display. "Too many people
> accessing". Heh.
> Mark L. Fergerson