[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MIT wireless energy transfer etc. (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 09:41:16 +0100
From: Chris Swinson <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: MIT wireless energy transfer etc. (fwd)
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:31:01 -0700
> From: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: List moderator <mod1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: MIT wireless energy transfer etc.
> Perhaps this question might be closer to 'on topic'. One of the
> features of this demonstration was the use of "self-resonant" coils and
> another was speculation as to why their measured Q was less than
> expected, with a suggestion that further research was needed in that
> respect. My personal thought would be that capacity loaded coils would
> have less loss [higher Q]. I'm not about to spend the money to copy
> their coil but their measured Q seems to be in line with what I would
> expect. Also in working with smaller antenna loading coils [perhaps 6"
> x 6" maximum size] I've never seen much difference between bare coils
> which had been sitting around until thoroughly oxidized and the same
> coils wound with enamel wire which presumably were shiny clean copper.
> Anyone have any thoughts here?
imho top capacitance lowers Q.