New Inductance

I assume we are talking about this?

Have you done this yourself? It seems like a fairly simple design to test, at least it could be built in a couple of days...

That would either lay this to rest, or move this discussion on.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff
Loading thread data ...

Try nearly zero.

If you look at the corrrect page you see the derivation. The velocity is not required to calculate its effect. It is a well known result taught at my uni.

And the quantum mechanics comes from standard results origiating in microwave physics but it applies at all frequencies the frequency of the qaunta is the driving freqency a well knowen result.

Reply to
The Real Chris

Yes no problem at all. I did not have the copper pot round it though. It was a while ago so I might have a go and make another. What is special about it any way? It pretty damm obvious to me!

I might find the iron filings and potting compound difficult now I'm retired.

Chris.

formatting link

Reply to
The Real Chris

On 17 Jul 2006 07:36:36 -0700, "Ken S. Tucker" Gave us:

Nope. He is merely making shit up as he goes along.

Remember, this is the twit that wants us to place "some flux" in an envelope and send it to him.

He lacks some *very* basic electrical theory understanding to make statements like that.

Reply to
Phat Bytestard

At the "microscopic" level, quantum mechanics is applicable. However its usefulness at the macroscopic level is very questionable. I would suggest that there is a point where continuum mechanics are needed to handle the problem in that one is dealing with extremely many particles at different energy levels and cannot distinguish between them but where the overall behaviour can be well represented by continuum mechanics. Is the magnetic field any more imaginary than a virtual photon? I have doubts. How much have you done using circuit theory? Why would you use it instead of EM theory? Why isn't EM theory used in the design and analysis of electromechanical machines?- it can be done and I did use it successfully for analysis/testing of a special motor in my PhD thesis work at U of Illinois. The answer to the questions is that there is, generally, no need to do so- the first order approximations of a quasi static situation work extremely well at the frequencies involved and dimensions well below

1/4 wavelength. I have been involved professionally in Electrical Engineering since the 50's. Admittedly that has produced some biases- among which, looking for a complex explanation where a simple one suffices, is not necessarily productive. Note that one thing that I presented to Chris was an alternative but classical approach dealing with the interaction between moving charges, leading to the Lorentz force equation (ignoring the electrostatic term for convenience). This he has completely ignored. If he had given it the consideration that I gave his earlier statements (or rather those of his former prof -which make sense but provide nothing new) and shown error- then I would not be so dismissive. Also part of the dismissiveness is the statements he made about a photon shield around the windings of a transformer- it turns out that apparently he may not have used a closed shield or shorted turn-that makes quite a difference -but also has no data indicating that there is any of the assumed reduction in losses. Sorry, one can only suspend disbelief for so long.

I also note that General Relativity as expressed by Einstein, has no relationship to quantum mechanics (which he didn't believe in) and quantum mechanics is hopeless when trying to look at large scale phenoma in galaxies. In fact there likely is some unified theory (note "theory) which explains it all. String theory seems to be the "in" thing. Chris's contribution is that he has jogged some discussion and thought- no more.

You are more of a gentleman than I am.

Dr. Don Kelly snipped-for-privacy@shawcross.ca remove the X to answer

Reply to
Don Kelly

Well, there's been quite a bit said about that copper mesh shield! Any time you can cook up a little easy empirical proof for a theory seems like a good enough reason for an experiment. It's not obvious to me, but it sure is interesting.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

When I used to work for Boeing, these were the guys we'd send out to fetch a bucket of prop wash.

Reply to
Paul Hovnanian P.E.

We were thinking of a different sort of 'getting potted'.

;-)

Reply to
Paul Hovnanian P.E.

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:30:32 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." Gave us:

I was only fooled once. A co-worker gave me a small screw with buggered up threads on it, and told me to go ask the supervisor to "cram" it, stating that he had a screw crammer that would straighten out the threads. Turns out such tools do exist, but the boss, and the boys had a different agenda with me.

They got REAL mad when I drew Secretariat in the pool. I friggin won too, and they ripped me off for the loot. Me, a kid, didn't even know I got screwed. They gave me $20, and it was supposed to be like $80 or more (a lot back then).

So much for my story of humility. Boss still liked me though.

Polishing huge stainless steel plates to a grade 6 surface quality for use by Proctor and Gamble, and the food industry to make food processing tanks out of. Sheets... bars... you name it.

I learned a lot about the world learning about surface quality and the like. I think it would a lot of guys good to learn such things on the way up.

Why does english work in billiards? What? Not an instantaneous clack and rebound when the balls hit? No? Really?

The phrase for today is:

Modulus of Elasticity

Not to mention:

Coefficient of Friction

Stainless steel is some neat stuff!

Jus' grindin' out the pits...

Reply to
Phat Bytestard

By the way Faraday said the motor force is between the windings. This is similar. The electronic interaction in a transformer is between the windings. The closer they are the better.

Try two straight parallel wires >>

Reply to
The Real Chris

? "Phat Bytestard" ?????? ??? ?????? news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

This reminds me of some english textbook long ago... "The boss told me to get a glass nail, a left handed screwdriver and a can of striped paint". "Just stop and think for a minute, lad!"

-- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios major in electrical engineering,freelance electrician

542nd mechanized infantry batallion dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
Reply to
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios

Sky hook and wire stretcher comes to mind...

Reply to
Skenny

At that point it isn't DC anymore since it is duty cycled......That would be a square wave would it not?....

Reply to
Ross Mac

As sailors in the Navy, we used all sorts of tricks like that on the newbie.

Some of the more famous...

1) Fetch me some relative bearing grease 2) I need ten feet of water line. 3) We drew straws and you have the mail bouy watch.

daestrom

Reply to
daestrom

What are the iron filings for?

Reply to
Paul Hovnanian P.E.

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:34:56 GMT, "The Real Chris" Gave us:

No, he didn't.

No, it isn't.

Wrong. Interwinding capacitance becomes an issue.

AGAIN, I have made transformers, and so has the rest of the world where the secondary MUST be segregated from the primary. They have OVER 2kV isolation, and they are just as efficient as a transformer where the windings are placed over each other.

You're an idiot. A loop is REQUIRED. Two, in fact for transformers.

Reply to
Phat Bytestard

Dear Phat Bytestard:

"Phat Bytestard" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com... ...

Every rule has an exception (even this one?)...

An autotransformer is a transformer with one winding ("loop"). ;>)

David A. Smith

Reply to
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 19:19:37 -0700, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" Gave us:

A "loop" is a turn in this case, not a winding. He stated that two straight wires will work, and they will not.

More accurately, in an autotransformer a portion of the same winding effectively acts as part of both the primary and secondary winding. Still requires a core, and more than one turn (loop).

Even with only two loops, a 1 to 1 transformer can be made in this configuration.

There are no single loop autotransformers (or transformers of any kind). That would be an inductor. The taps cannot be on the same turn (loop).

Reply to
Phat Bytestard

Reply to
The Real Chris

He did. Have look.

Reply to
The Real Chris

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.