Re: Aluminum vs Copper Primaries

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Jim Lux" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net> 

The units are indeed ohm-cm or something like that...

Resistance = Length *resistivity/area -> = cm * ohm-cm/(cm *cm = ohm

Interesting point about skin depth etc.. Basically, though, it's a losing
battle.. skin depth goes as the square root of resistivity, as I recall, so
doubling resistivity only gets you 1.4 more skin depth, and you'd need 2 to
match it.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 4:27 PM
Subject: Aluminum vs Copper Primaries


 > Original poster: Harvey Norris <harvich-at-yahoo-dot-com>
 >
 > We normally think that since Aluminum has a higher
 > resistivity, that more losses might be involved in
 > using an aluminum primary vs that of a copper one. I
 > get about a half ohm for 100 ft of this 1/2 inch
 > diameter aluminum cable I am using.
 >
 > The chart at
 > http://hot-streamer-dot-com/temp/skindepth.gif
 > shows that copper is 1.7 micro-ohm/ cm
 > (I assume that is supposed to be micro-ohm/cm^2 to
 > express area)
 > and that aluminum is 3.02 micro-ohm/cm^2
 > which would be a value showing that Al has 77% more
 > resistance then equal volumes of Cu
 >
 > But when we compare the skin depth at 200,000 hz we
 > find that copper has about .06 inch vs aluminum at .08
 > inch, so Al has 33% more penetration from the currents
 > at high freq then does copper.
 >
 > In viewing the trade-off here should we then think,
 > that given a sufficiently wide circumference of the
 > primary itself as a cross section, that aluminum is
 > actually only about 44% more less efficient for high
 > frequency conduction currents then copper?
 >
 > This also raises the question of  what is the % of
 > time periods involved when the primary is actually in
 > high frequency vs the time when it is in source
 > frequency conduction. Isnt the high frequency time
 > period small compared to when the source frequency
 > currents are acting? This would mean that aluminum
 > would appear closer to 77% more resistance.
 >
 > These are probably irrevalent issues, but I am
 > wondering since I constructed a primary using wider
 > circumference aluminum power cable, designated as 3/0
 > gauge about 1/2 inch in diameter, but it is also
 > stranded with about 18 strands distributed in the
 > grouping. Will the skin effect still take place on
 > each of these strands, even though they are adjacent
 > to each other with their surface areas coming into
 > contact?
 >
 > Finally is the primary resistance not something to be
 > concerned about, since the losses involved in the
 > actual primary arc gap would be far greater then the
 > losses involved on the lines themselves?
 >
 > Sincerely HDN
 >
 >