> Hi,

though there is a great deal of energy interaction going on their is

> Or, more probably they will cancel each other out and even

no net gain or loss if a perfect system is assumed but in a real

world system there will be an overall loss due to various factors,

resistance in an electrical system being the most obvious. AC

electricity is an example of this.> MJ

Very astute observation Mike. However here's something that you may

not account for in sizings of components. We could call this the

Norris Theorem, in formation;

FOR ANY PARTICULAR DESIGNATED FREQUENCY: THERE IS A CERTAIN POINT OF

RESONATING INDUCTANCE, NORMALLY A VERY HIGH INDUCTANCE AT 60 HZ

APPLICATION, WHEREBY WITH THIS LARGER VALUE OF INDUCTANCE, THE ENERGY

TRANSFER RATE BETWEEN ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS WILL EXCEED THE

ENERGY TRANSFER RATE TO HEAT, AS DESIGNATED BY I^2R HEAT LOSSES, AS

EXPRESSED BY THE JOULES/SEC WATTAGE EQUIVALENTS.

Let us take the example of the 1000 ohm, 60 henry coil resonating at

60 hz. It uses .12 uf for resonance as the C value. The

greatest "limiting factor" in multiturn coils to produce large

inductance, is the internal capacity between windings. The reduces

the possible amount of resonance that occurs, by the ratio of the

acting q factor vs the theoretical q vfactor made by book

calaculations. For the 60 henry coil having an impedance of 20,000

ohms @ 60 hz vs 1000 ohms R value, this gives a theoretical Q of 20,

but the acting Q is 15, so right from the beginning this available

energy transfer has becomed limited to what will occur in the "real

world" situation. The real world situation shows that 25% of the

available resonance does not become available from these losses. Yet

we can still find that for this case that the energy transfer between

fields exceeds the energy transfer wasted as heat. When we resonate

this 1000 ohm coil, we should expect 120 ma to occur with a 20 fold

voltage gain, but instead we obtain a 80 ma current with a 15 fold

voltage gain. Thus I becomes .08 A and I^R becomes 6.4 watts.

15 fold the voltage across the capacity is 1800 volt for V in the

quantity .5CV^2, repesenting the stored energy in the capacity as;

.5*[1.2*10^-7]*1800^2 = .1944 joules which transfers energy to

magnetic field at the rate of 120 times per second, or 23.3 joules

per second, or 23 watts of energy oscillation between fields, which

is still over 3 times the energy that is truely expended which is 6.4

watts.

The changes in action for these same coils at 480 hz is severe, so

that ordinarily the acting Q factor is only 5 % of the theoretical Q,

which would be about 160. This about a 15 fold reduction in the q

factor in going from 60 hz to 480. Methods of making opposing

magnetic fields in resonance can increase the q factor to about 10%,

or a Q of 16, or about a 7.5 fold decrease in the acting q

factor/theoretical Q as found at 60 hz. BUT, both of these q factors

are still rougly the same for the special circumstance. What was

being compared was only the "ratio" of reduction of q factors from

the theoretical one made by calculation. Thus at 480 hz compared to

60 hz, even though the internal capacitive impedance losses are

massive, there is still the possibility that the energy transfer will

excced the heat transfer, because the ACTING Q factors have remained

near identical.

Now we have again reference to the capacitive storage term, .5CV^2.

For cases of making comparisons at 60 hz vs 480 hz, the exponential

term V^2 will remain the same, however the C value exponentially goes

into the reverse direction, so that now instead of 8 times less

capacity, we need 64 times less capacity.(actually more than 64 in

real world actions) This is somewhat compensated for by the fact that

now once the amount of energy storage is found, it will have an 8

fold higher multiplier factor then the 60 hz consideration.

So at first glance it looks like at 480 hz, the energies in

oscillation might not exceed the energy expended as heat. Perhaps

these reckonings indicate a smaller frequency with less losses might

be desirable.

This same above argument using the value of .5LI^2 as the energy

transfer term should apply, since .5CV^2=.5LI^2 at resonance.

However a special circumstance exists for the high induction coils

resonance , which is what makes the capacity smaller then the

theoretically 64 fold reduced derived value @ 480 hz, hence limiting

the energy transfer term on that side of things. However on the

inductor portion of energy transfer, there is a problem that it

appears more reactive then it should be hence it is acting with a

higher L term, making for a higher energy transfer when considered on

that side of the equation. Perhaps this has a lot to do with the

coils internal capacity, as coils of this nature use less capacity

then would be predicted by theoretical calaculations to resonate when

the frequency is increased

HDN