Chronology |
Current Month |
Current Thread |
Current Date |

[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |

*From*: brian whatcott <betwys1@sbcglobal.net>*Date*: Fri, 23 May 2014 10:00:22 -0500

Timothy had the decisive insight. So Antti would be better served by the loss fraction given in this way:

(Power Lost) / (Power Lost plus Power Delivered) - a fraction which never exceeds nor even equals one.

Brian Whatcott Altus OK Indian Territory.

On 5/23/2014 6:42 AM, Folkerts, Timothy J wrote:

The "loss fraction" on the page you mention is the ratio of

(power lost) / (power delivered)

It was not

(power lost) / (power generated).

So if you generate 1 kWh and 0.1 kWh is delivered and 0.9 kWh are lost, you could either say that 90% of the original power is lost (always between 0-1), or that 9 times as much power is lost as delivered (between 0 and infinity). These are two ways of saying the same thing.

Tim

________________________________________

From: Phys-l [phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] on behalf of Savinainen Antti [antti.savinainen@kuopio.fi]

Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:38 AM

To: phys-l@phys-l.org

Subject: [Phys-L] Power loss in transmission lines

Hi,

I suppose that the power loss in transmission lines is part of most intro courses on E&M. The basic idea is quite clear: given a certain produced power, the greater the voltage the smaller the current is, which means the smaller power loss in the transmission lines. So far so good. We had a simple quantitative calculation on the power loss and I casually asked my students check the case when the voltage is pretty low. This gave a nonsensical answer. I looked at the situation,and quickly derived a formula of the loss fraction. The same formula can be found here: <http://www.bsharp.org/physics/transmission> (Scroll down to the section "High-Voltage Transmission Lines").

What bothers me is that the loss fraction can conceivably be one or even more, which is clearly not physical. Perhaps I am missing something?

Regards,

Antti

--

*************************************************************************

Viesti on tarkastettu roskapostinsuodatus- ja virustorjuntaohjelmistolla.

*************************************************************************

**References**:**[Phys-L] Power loss in transmission lines***From:*Savinainen Antti <antti.savinainen@kuopio.fi>

**Re: [Phys-L] Power loss in transmission lines***From:*"Folkerts, Timothy J" <FolkertsT@bartonccc.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: [Phys-L] Power loss in transmission lines** - Next by Date:
**[Phys-L] Fwd: A Dramatic Rendering of A Stirring Tale.... /Dynamite/Kieselguhr/New Mexico** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [Phys-L] Power loss in transmission lines** - Next by thread:
**[Phys-L] request for article** - Index(es):