Re: Oil insulated secondaries (fwd) (Aluminum plate under coil. Does it waste power? No!) (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:13:13 -0600
From: Gomez Addams <gomezaddams@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Oil insulated secondaries (fwd)  (Aluminum plate under coil.  Does
    it waste power?  No!) (fwd)


On Sep 10, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Tesla list wrote:

>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 16:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
> From: J. Aaron Holmes <jaholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Oil insulated secondaries (fwd)  (Aluminum plate under  
> coil.  Does
>     it waste power?  No!)
>
> Hey, Peter:
>
> This was discussed quite a bit on 4HV a short while
> back, and almost universally contradicted (to my
> surprise, I'll admit).  However, IIRC, it can be
> easily explained like this:  Because copper and
> aluminum are great conductors, it's extremely
> difficult to induction heat them (i.e., cause them to
> "waste" power).

Hang on, what happened to I-squared-R?  Sure, R may be
very, very low in this case, but given that power dissipated
goes as the SQUARE of the current, and given that a shorted
single turn (ie; a plate intercepting a significant portion
of a changing magnetic field) can have quite a lot of current
flowing in it, I don't see how the idea of wasting power in a
conductor is disproved at all.

However, I am thinking of current induced in it by the
primary field.  If the plate intercepts only a small
area of the primary's field, then it may not be worth
mentioning.

  -  Bill "Gomez" Lemieux

...............................................................
Listen up George Bush, television news anchors, radio talk show
hosts, and all you other illiterates: there are no such words
as 'nucular', 'relator' or 'jewlery'!