Why do I make such a good ground?

[Chris A]

Tesla is responsible for all this confusion...he should have listened to Edison... []

Chris

[dtel]

This will definitely address common mode buzz.

That's true, I like to address the common mode buzz when listening to music myself, but the hum is a completely different problem. []

[dtel]

Tesla is responsible for all this confusion...he should have listened to Edison...

Chris

They have a really good story about Tesla and Edison and the fight as to what type of electricity to power cities with and each of there inventions, it was on the Discovery or History channel a while back.

Tesla had some cool and strange contraptions including some for the military, or were confiscated by the military .

[Mallette]

Tesla had some cool and strange contraptions including some for the military, or were confiscated by the military .

Tesla is the strangest genious in recent history. By "recent," I mean like since Da Vinci. Mark Twain swears he saw Tesla levitated in a field. The way it's written you can tell he realizes many will assume he is joking and is trying to offset that issue and ensure he's taken seriously.

I've read that, since the giant transmission tower he was building to demonstrate wireless power transmission was never completed and no one else has tried it on that scale, the jury is still out on whether it will work. He demonstrated it on a small scale but stated that the transmission range would increase in proportion to the size of the equpment. The foundations of the huge tower and one of the buildings that was to house this experiment still remain. I believe he lost funding to complete it.

Hard to believe that a person so relatively recent can be so little known or understood.

Dave

[Chris A]

The PBS show on Tesla is very interesting - especially his personality and personal life...I recommend the show highly.

Tesla and Steinmetz were the real giants of AC power, IMHO. Edison was basically a research-assistant taskmaster: he had something like 100 of assistants working for him like slaves-- and they didn't get the credit that was due.

Tesla was a lab rat and had a little math background. But most of his failures were due to his not doing the math before he tried the experiment. Wireless power transmission was one of those subjects, for instance: there is just not very much power that can be transmitted in that fashion.

Interestingly, the swing in power transmission is back to DC and local power co-generation via basement-located diesel-electric engines (something like Edison proposed). It turns out that local DC power can be more efficient and is much more resistant to EMP events, like our now-overdue 100-year solar flare event like the 1859 event. Another event one like that one today would put a lot of people back in pre-civil war society, especially the U.S. Eastern Interconnect grid. []

Chris

[dtel]

What I liked about Tesla was he was not afraid to dream up very unconventional ideas, although many had never been completed he used what he learned to design other things even wilder. I don't doubt some of his inventions have been used without public knowledge, in secret by the military or similar.

[Mallette]

Wireless power transmission was one of those subjects, for instance: there is just not very much power that can be transmitted in that fashion.

May not be a good example. My understanding is that no one has attempted to duplicate his experiments on the scale he said was required for it to be efficient. He didn't make it a point to document his math or concepts in great detail so we don't really know for sure what preciese methodology he intended to use. Just this morning I hard that researchers had put out a fire with an electric field. They'd been researching the effects of electricity on a plasma for years...but had never tried AC. Yes, it sounds bizarre, but those are the facts as reported. Now they are talking about all sorts of possibilities just from this simple oversight.

My own thoughts on Tesla is that he was way too far ahead of his time, as well as ours, to be fully successful or understood. AC seems like "duh" to us now, but it was, in fact, an enormous intelletual leap. Further, I personally believe Twains tale of seeing Tesla levitated. I've read enough Twain to feel comfortable with when he is stretching and when he is describing an actual event. Further, I have always made it a point to accept what I consider a trained or credible observer even over "common sense" as I might know it.

Dave

[Hifi jim]

Tesla and Steinmetz were the real giants of AC power, IMHO.

I think George Westinghouse and Tesla were the real giants of AC power. After Tesla left Edison's company, Westinghouse bought the AC motor patent that Tesla developed. Westinghouse and Edison then each tried to have their own systems adopted.

Interestingly, the swing in power transmission is back to DC and local power co-generation via basement-located diesel-electric engines (something like Edison proposed). It turns out that local DC power can be more efficient and is much more resistant to EMP events, like our now-overdue 100-year solar flare event like the 1859 event. Another event one like that one today would put a lot of people back in pre-civil war society, especially the U.S. Eastern Interconnect grid.

The problem with a DC system is that it requires more local co-gens which in turn require more fuel, and more maintenance. I'm not sure how that's more efficient?

[Mallette]

I'm not sure how that's more efficient?

Main suspect: Far less very expensive infrastructure for long hauls. I've little doubt that one of those giant power plant NG fueled generators could make more power with less gas that I could and would be ideal if the power could be sent to me at zero loss. That can't happen unless Tesla's ideas work and are put into place.

However, I've talked with a number of people who have purchased NG power alternators for their homes and they are running their homes at greatly reduced cost. Some even sell off to the grid when rates are so high that they get almost as much back from the power company as it is costing them to run the things.

I suspect one could calculate the perfect place to place an NG or similar reasonably clean power plant that would cover only the area calculated for maximum performance. That is, the distance where more power lost to the various issues of transmission was balanced against the scale and cost of the plant.

Sounds logical, and there is always the question: "Well, you can bet they tried that and found it didn't work out."

Personally, I doubt it. The power companies carefully avoid information like I led with. A story about a Houston hospital installing a local NG plant was so carefully worded it took a while to figure out that what they were saying was the hospital would have a more reliable power source and save a lot of money.

Dave

[Chris A]

The power companies carefully avoid information like I led with. A story about a Houston hospital installing a local NG plant was so carefully worded it took a while to figure out that what they were saying was the hospital would have a more reliable power source and save a lot of money.

touché!

The current U.S., power grid architecture issues that I have dealt with have been related to the degree of the grid's "non-distributed architecture" and its resulting complex interdependency behaviors within the large interconnects (i.e., the U.S., Eastern, Western, and ERCOT interconnects - with particular emphasis on the eastern grid, unfortunately) and the inability of those "system-of -systems" to control their behavior in a useful way when bad things happen--such as large solar flare ("E3") events but also events that happen even less often: like man-made induced events.

These interconnects are so complex and politically/legally constrained in terms of preparing for and carrying out crisis policies, like how to drop loads and how to quickly disconnect from interconnect exchanges without threat of lawsuits and armchair quarterbacking by the public, that these systems are becoming accidents waiting to happen--with due deference to my electric power industry buddies--who happen to be great people.

I think that we're getting to the point where our current legal and political systems are in effect forcing the further distribution of generation resources and the heterogenization of fuel and renewable power resources. Long transmission lines are currently a big problem - a BIG problem--that we collectively should be very concerned about. Just look at the 2004 EMP commission report. Very tough political problems here--almost as severe as the U.S., "Social Security crisis" (...trust me...).

Further, the public outcry about rising costs have driven the power generation community to decrease their margins--which is pure insanity from a system-of-systems perspective--resulting in "Smart Grid" concepts to "increase power generation affordability". This is not a good trend.

Microgrids and local co- and tri-generation approaches look to be much more robust and more able to recover quickly from large calamities, depending on the fuel/power sources that they run on. You get to recover a great portion of the 52% rejected energy in the form of heat, i.e., ideal-100% Carnot efficiency is ~48% of total energy, that is currently lost in most U.S. power plants in my part of the woods, and you can avoid most of the 6-7% of transmission losses that are currently the state-of-the-art in the national power transmission losses. You also can expand the grid more incrementally and readily than large power generation stations--especially fission plants--which are currently mired in U.S. regulation.

My $0.02

Chris

[Don Richard]

I've read that, since the giant transmission tower he was building to demonstrate wireless power transmission was never completed and no one else has tried it on that scale, the jury is still out on whether it will work. He demonstrated it on a small scale but stated that the transmission range would increase in proportion to the size of the equpment. The foundations of the huge tower and one of the buildings that was to house this experiment still remain. I believe he lost funding to complete it.

Long distance wireless electrical power transmission simply will not work. The problem centers around the inverse square law - every time one doubles the distance the power falls off by a factor of four. It would take a megawatt to transmit 100 watts of power a few miles.

Interestingly, the man who introduced me to Khorns had an amateur radio transmitter (1 KW) hooked to a large beam antenna. You could walk around his yard under the antenna with a flourescent bulb that would light up whenever he was transmitting. Walking into the street would extinguish the bulb. Thats 1 KW at high frequency to light a 40 watt flourescent tube at a 50 foot distance. When we tried that under an AM broadcast station antenna there was no light. The antenna was simply too high to transmit enough energy to light the tube.

[Hifi jim]

The power companies carefully avoid information like I led with. A story about a Houston hospital installing a local NG plant was so carefully worded it took a while to figure out that what they were saying was the hospital would have a more reliable power source and save a lot of money.

touché!

The current U.S., power grid architecture issues that I have dealt with have been related to the degree of the grid's "non-distributed architecture" and its resulting complex interdependency behaviors within the large interconnects (i.e., the U.S., Eastern, Western, and ERCOT interconnects - with particular emphasis on the eastern grid, unfortunately) and the inability of those "system-of -systems" to control their behavior in a useful way when bad things happen--such as large solar flare ("E3") events but also events that happen even less often: like man-made induced events.

These interconnects are so complex and politically/legally constrained in terms of preparing for and carrying out crisis policies, like how to drop loads and how to quickly disconnect from interconnect exchanges without threat of lawsuits and armchair quarterbacking by the public, that these systems are becoming accidents waiting to happen--with due deference to my electric power industry buddies--who happen to be great people.

I think that we're getting to the point where our current legal and political systems are in effect forcing the further distribution of generation resources and the heterogenization of fuel and renewable power resources. Long transmission lines are currently a big problem - a BIG problem--that we collectively should be very concerned about. Just look at the 2004 EMP commission report. Very tough political problems here--almost as severe as the U.S., "Social Security crisis" (...trust me...).

Further, the public outcry about rising costs have driven the power generation community to decrease their margins--which is pure insanity from a system-of-systems perspective--resulting in "Smart Grid" concepts to "increase power generation affordability". This is not a good trend.

Microgrids and local co- and tri-generation approaches look to be much more robust and more able to recover quickly from large calamities, depending on the fuel/power sources that they run on. You get to recover a great portion of the 52% rejected energy in the form of heat, i.e., ideal-100% Carnot efficiency is ~48% of total energy, that is currently lost in most U.S. power plants in my part of the woods, and you can avoid most of the 6-7% of transmission losses that are currently the state-of-the-art in the national power transmission losses. You also can expand the grid more incrementally and readily than large power generation stations--especially fission plants--which are currently mired in U.S. regulation.

My $0.02

Chris

Chris, thanks for the informative reply.

[Mallette]

Long distance wireless electrical power transmission simply will not work.

I'd submit that hypothesis remains untested. Tesla's small scale demos greatly impressed many scientists at the time. No one could duplicate them, but they saw them. He insisted that his methodology required great scale for efficiency, but that experiment was never completed. He died without revealing the nature of his concept, nor have any notes been found.

I don't think it is objective to simply say something will not work until it is demonstrated that it will not work.

Then, you test another method until your results change. I am a firm believer that there are no problems math and science cannot solve given enough time.

Dave

PS - this really ought to be in "General." It's my thread and I am enjoying this diversion but my dang plasma is still creating a hum and Tesla isn't here to help!

[Hifi jim]

Long distance wireless electrical power transmission simply will not work. The problem centers around the inverse square law - every time one doubles the distance the power falls off by a factor of four. It would take a megawatt to transmit 100 watts of power a few miles.

I agree. MIT has managed to light a 60 watt bulb at 7 feet. That currently is the high art of wireless power transmission. I think super conductors will be perfected (for purposes of power transmission) long before wireless, especially at this rate.

[Mallette]

I think super conductors will be perfected (for purposes of power transmission) long before wireless, especially at this rate.

That's the holy grail for efficient power transmission IF:

1. It can be done

2. Economically.

I think there is probably a better chance both these conditions will be met before Tesla's thoughts are re-discovered...assuming he was right in the first place. Further, consider what economical super conducting circuits circuit boards would do for so many devices and applications.

Each and every day I awake expecting some scientific discovery that will bring about a paradigm shift. Looking back, the first semiconductor was one such, though not really recognized for just how profound a change it would bring to all humans and thier cultures.

Well, it didn't happen today... Maybe tomorrow.

Dave

[Don Richard]

Long distance wireless electrical power transmission simply will not work.

I'd submit that hypothesis remains untested. Tesla's small scale demos greatly impressed many scientists at the time. No one could duplicate them, but they saw them. He insisted that his methodology required great scale for efficiency, but that experiment was never completed. He died without revealing the nature of his concept, nor have any notes been found.

I don't think it is objective to simply say something will not work until it is demonstrated that it will not work.

Neither is it objective to say something will work simply because you don't understand why it can't.

Tesla was a visionary, ahead of his time. But he's not ahead of our time. He recieved many conceptual patents, over 20 IIRC, involving radio transmission. But it was Marconi who put it all together and made radio practical. With radio you have a 50KW transmitter and 100 miles away the signal level is microvolts. You cannot efficiently transmit useful power over that distance, only information or data.

Wireless transmission of power is actually used every day now, using inductive coupling to transmit AC short distances, several yards or so. Not enough to even run your house.

Ten years ago I recieved some samples from a chip manufacturer of a new fiber optic reciever that was powered from the transmitted light and could output several volts, at a low current. Enough power to transmit data only, similar to the limitations of radio transmission.

Dave, aren't you are already having problems with incidental radiation from a plasma screen? Imagine what would happen with 10000 times the ERP. None of us could hear our music systems over all of the hum.

[Mallette]

Don, everything you said is well put and rational. I was generalizing. Certainly, even if Tesla had a concept that would allow effective and efficient energy transmission, it might not be practical today due to the issues you mention.

I was just pointing out that so many things are said to be "impossible" and then someone goes at it a new way and it's ubiqitous.

I tell my staff: "Are you saying it cannot be done, or that you don't know how to do it? There is a difference you know..."

Dave

PS - Just chatted a moment with one of my colleagues who is far better educated in these things than I. He says Tesla's project was cancelled by George W when Tesla told him that it would be easy to steal the power transmitted. Further, while no one know the details that died with him, he made it clear it was based on balanced resonance and required very large scale. My friend says it would not have interfered with devices that were not in resonance with it. Also, things might have gone a completely different route technologically. In theory, all of our data, communications, and other traffic that go by a variety of means could have been piggybacked on the power creating immense reliability and cost efficiency.

Not standing behind any of that as I am no Tesla, but it would make a heckuva fine alternate history scifi novel...

[Don Richard]

Further, while no one know the details that died with him, he made it clear it was based on balanced resonance and required very large scale. My friend says it would not have interfered with devices that were not in resonance with it.

Translation: He used tuned circuits. All radios use tuned circuits. Nonetheless, RF transmission can interfere with devices not in tune with the transmitter. Before I went to pro sound type balanced equipment I would often hear the CBers on the interstate over a mile away through the stereo.

By "large scale" Tesla meant having transmission towers a mile apart spaced in a grid formation throughout a city, similar to the cell phone towers in use today. What I heard was that the efficiency of wired distribution of electrical power (which was invented totally by Tesla) was so much better than wireless that the project was scrapped.

Trust me, with copper and aluminum prices like they are now, if we could efficiently transmit electric power another way we would be doing it.

[Mallette]

Trust me, with copper and aluminum prices like they are now, if we could efficiently transmit electric power another way we would be doing it.

Don, I trust you...however, given that almost nothing we do is being done the best or most efficient way I don't buy the rest of your sentence. I hear that one constantly and see very little in the way of evidence that it is true.

Dave