So what dose the magnetic field look like within a toroid coil?. Is the magnetic field contained within the toroid core?,and wich field is it-north or south?.
My first test looking at a field being expelled outward from the toroid coil.But listen carefuly to the video near the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNOtEDkCSpA
You can find it in Wickipedia and in many good books and articles about transformers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toroidal_inductors_and_transformers#Toroidal_inductor.2Ftransformer_and_magnetic_vector_potential
http://www.pa-international.com.au/index.php?option=com_easyblog&view=entry&id=20&Itemid=177#Study:
Greetings, Conrad
This PDF explains it quite clearly as to how the fields propagate through a toroid core and coils. I believe it is correct. ;) Its only 18 pages. Read carefully, and you will get the picture. ;D
Mags
Sorry. Hit quote instead of modify to correct spelling of 'cor' to core. ;) Too bad there wasnt a delete feature that had like a 1 min time frame in which to do so if a mistake were made such as I just did.
Mags
Just click the 'edit' button and remove all you want deleted.
If you wish to delete all text, remove all but the 'period', and click save...and bob's yer uncle.
Regards...
Tinman:
With the application of Ampere's Law and by drawing an Amperian loop inside a toroid you can derive the formula that tells you what the magnetic field strength inside a toroid is.
QuoteIn classical electromagnetism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electromagnetism), Ampère's circuital law, discovered by André-Marie Ampère (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9-Marie_Amp%C3%A8re) in 1826,[1] relates the integrated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_integral) magnetic field (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field) around a closed loop to the electric current (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current) passing through the loop. James Clerk Maxwell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clerk_Maxwell) derived it again using hydrodynamics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_dynamics) in his 1861 paper On Physical Lines of Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:On_Physical_Lines_of_Force.pdf) and it is now one of the Maxwell equations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_equations), which form the basis of classical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_physics) electromagnetism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetism).
The real thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)
QuoteIs the magnetic field contained within the toroid core?,and wich field is it-north or south?
I have posted several times recently that there is no such thing as a "North field" or a "South field" when it comes to a magnetic field. You have to wrap your mind around that one to understand magnetic fields.
MileHigh
Hey Cap
Yeah, I thought of just deleting all. But then there is a post that is blank, leaving some thinking, what was he going to say, but didnt? So I usually say something when it happens. ;)
Mags
Quote from: MileHigh on September 11, 2013, 09:44:34 PM
Tinman:
With the application of Ampere's Law and by drawing an Amperian loop inside a toroid you can derive the formula that tells you what the magnetic field strength inside a toroid is.
The real thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)
I have posted several times recently that there is no such thing as a "North field" or a "South field" when it comes to a magnetic field. You have to wrap your mind around that one to understand magnetic fields.
MileHigh
I strongly disagree. :P
"The real thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)"
At 5:40, and I was waiting for this, listen to what he says about fields in the hole of the toroid.
There are fields in that open area. This is where the windings have mutual inductance. This is where fields of each winding are able to 'cut' other windings or turns of the coil in order to have mutual inductance. The pdf I posted above explains it quite perfectly and it describes 'why' those fields could not possibly only remain in the core, which is very important to understand. ;)
Lets take the toroid diagram in the vid and make it a transformer. Primary on the left and secondary on the right. Now, if the primary induces a field in the core, how does the secondary get induced if the field is only in the core? ??? The wire does not have 'feelers' out there that detect if a field is 'locked' in the core. The field of the primary has to 'cut' the windings of the secondary. It is basic mutual induction. So why is that not explained in the video??? The pdf in my previous post, and I will repost it here, explains it perfectly. Dont get board with the pdf. Its 18 pages and it should be read till it is understood as a whole. It corrects the problem of the ideas presented in this vid posted by Milehigh.
If you put a wire through the very center of the toroid opening,not even touching any toroid windings or the core, you will get current induced into that wire from an input to the toroidal coil. So how can that be, if the field is only in the core? ??? ?
There are many vids on YT that show this 1 wire through the middle. ;)
Mags
I told you that I don't want to have any interaction at all with you and I mean it.
Don't interact with me at all.
Quote from: MileHigh on September 11, 2013, 11:43:03 PM
I told you that I don't want to have any interaction at all with you and I mean it.
Don't interact with me at all.
Whatever dude.
That vid you posted is malarky with math to explain the malarky. People deserve the truth, and that vid isnt it. I was wondering if the vid would get into those facts and surprisingly it did. ;)
Yeah, you PM'd me. And I didnt respond. If I see you preaching garbage, I will respond. And I did. I will post where ever I please. :P Try to get me banned on that. ;D :P
Mags
The posting below is primarily about you and I don't want to interact with you, period.
I can relate to the detractors and enemies schtick too.
I have had people say to ignore all my postings because I am supposedly an extremist. I have had people relentlessly bash me for days and days and days, picking apart anything I say trying to twist it into something bad. People that personally attack me over and over. People that say that I am "polluting" the threads. I once tried to explain to someone how to test their transistor because after two years of building pulse motors the only thing that he could do was make sure the wire lengths were equal. (??) Then that person had a total freak-out on me and went ballistic. I have been bashed over and over because I don't show any bench work yet in my educational and professional life I have spent literally thousands of hours on the bench.
And the ironic thing is that with good intentions and without malice I am simply trying to tell people the truth and I try sometimes to educate them. I am not perfect and I can't always speak in politically correct prose so as to not offend someone that in reality has no clue whatsoever about what they are trying to do. It's too easy to claim that you have a fragile ego and cry that you are being belittled when in fact that's not the truth. When I sometimes make a really good suggestion the response is mute silence. If a beginner that barely knows what he or she is doing makes the same suggestion, they are heaped with praise.
What irks me the most is the peer pressure among the forum members themselves. I coined a term for it, "Orwellian stagnation." If an outsider comes to the forum with a crazy proposition many people will challenge the person. But if an insider to the forum makes a crazy proposition, then in the majority of cases nobody will say anything. And I have seen things posted on this forum by insiders that are ridiculous and counter-productive for people that are trying to learn something.
The bottom line is that I will stand my ground. Anybody that thinks that I am a "bad guy" because I speak the truth to the best of my abilities is wrong. This notion that I am "demeaning and belittling people" is driven by the ego issues of others, because I don't consciously make an effort to demean and belittle people. On the flip side, I have seen many people consciously and maliciously demean and belittle me - without merit - and it all stems from their own frustrations.
You indeed have to have a thick skin sometimes. I have no problem having thick skin. But if somebody is going to maliciously and relentlessly go after me and try to make my life miserable I will push back.
MileHigh
You stay the fuck away from me.
The YouTube user Lasseviren1 is a science teacher and was gracious enough to post about 200 videos covering physics, dynamics, electrostatics, electricity and magnetism, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/user/lasseviren1/videos
That's where the clip I posted about the toroid's magnetic field comes from. The guy is great and if you look at his first few clips he explains derivatives and integrals. So if you get that then you should be able to follow his nice clear "paper talk" explanations using paper and a marker. He knows his stuff, he is a great communicator, and I encourage people to look at his clips.
He does several examples of using Ampere's Law to solve for the magnetic field for various configurations, the toroid example is just one of them.
MileHigh
Stand your ground all you want. I expect nothing less from anyone here. It is everyones right. ;)
Instead of talking about the issues presented by me, well, look at your replies above.
I tell you what. If you read the itty bitty pdf and can give a reasonable dispute of its claims, of which contradict the video you posted, I would be willing to have that discussion on good terms.
I know you are trying to teach people here. But with facts like that, ones that would have Tesla laughing in his grave, someone needs to set the record straight. And on this, I stand my ground. Unless you can undeniably refute my stance on this thread subject with substantial evidence, not circumstantial. Can you do that?? ;)
Mags
Quote from: MileHigh on September 12, 2013, 12:08:12 AM
The YouTube user Lasseviren1 is a science teacher and was gracious enough to post about 200 videos covering physics, dynamics, electrostatics, electricity and magnetism, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/user/lasseviren1/videos (http://www.youtube.com/user/lasseviren1/videos)
That's where the clip I posted about the toroid's magnetic field comes from. The guy is great and if you look at his first few clips he explains derivatives and integrals. So if you get that then you should be able to follow his nice clear "paper talk" explanations using paper and a marker. He knows his stuff, he is a great communicator, and I encourage people to look at his clips.
He does several examples of using Ampere's Law to solve for the magnetic field for various configurations, the toroid example is just one of them.
MileHigh
I still say what was in the vid is incorrect when it comes to saying there are no fields in the doughnut holes of the core. The pdf explains it perfectly. You should really look at it. ;)
I would like to here the guys explanation of how a secondary as I described in my previous post could be induced by a field from the primary if 'all' of the field is locked in the core. ;) ;) ;) ;)
I would really like that. ;D
Mags
Yes Mr Eric Dollard is confused by toroidal transformer induction and says no one knows how it happens. ;D So I linked that PDF at EF maybe over 1 year ago. ;) In response to mbrowne.
Although I think it is theoretical.
I think bench tests are in order.
Cheers
AS far as my telling people to disregard MileHighs post in the Coil For Electromagnets thread, I said that because I felt a lot of posts were distracting from the actual effect Tesla intended to show.
Tell me MileHigh do you still deny that the voltage applied to a Coil For Electromagnets as described in the patent will change the resonant frequency due to capacitor plate separation distance and "effective" capacitance secured as a result of the voltage applied ?
If the plates are a certain distance apart then a certain voltage is required to secure the full capacitance possible. Simple.
I also described Synchro as an extremist, and in the context of that thread I felt it was true. The theory is sound. Tesla describes it in his patent and I explained how it is so.
Did Tesla lie about the claims ? I say no. The thread had nothing to do with the possible uses of the coil. It was to investigate the validity of the patent claims. They are true and correct. Yet some very educated people denied that was even possible. Gotta wonder who has the ego.
I say we all have ego's and ego is not a dirty word.
Just like this song by Skyhooks explains. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UduuxKdPt9Q
Cheers
Farmhand:
This is off topic but there are no substantive claims made in the patent. You are reading something into the patent that is not there. The patent just describes the architecture of the physical coil and says that it will have no impedance at the self-resonant frequency which is exactly what is supposed to happen. It's a patent that tells you how to build something and makes a comment about how it will behave at the self-resonant frequency. Beyond that there are no claims. And yes, the capacitance is not a function of the voltage in a general sense and I see no reason that the Tesla bifilar coil would have any special capacitance vs. voltage relationship.
Beyond that, to say "don't listen to that guy" on a discussion board is inappropriate to the extreme. How would you like it if somebody said to ignore all of your postings? Take that to the limit and you don't have a forum anymore.
Anyway, that's all water under the bridge and nobody that I am aware of ever made a significant demo of a "series bifilar coil" that showed any special redeeming qualities above and beyond a regular coil or above and beyond a regular coil in parallel with a tiny capacitor. As far as I am concerned this is just over reading of a document from the 19th century and imagining you can apply it to all sorts of unconnected and unrelated applications without any rational reason behind it.
Sorry Tinman, back to your thread. With respect to your clip, using a magnet as a core does not make any sense. I know that you see it being done everywhere but the simple fact is that it does not make any sense. The purpose of the core is to allow itself to get polarized in any direction so that it can store magnetic energy. A magnet as a core is already polarized in a fixed direction and by definition is not designed to store magnetic energy.
MileHigh
MH:
What about a core made from a neo magnet that has been heated above the currie temp. to demagnetize it? Would the properties that allow such a strong magnetic field to be had from the neo make it a good core choice then? Or, would it try to be magnetized when the field is on and then not collapse? The best thing I can find so far is Metglas.
Bill
Bill:
I haven't read up on magnetic core properties in a while but without brushing up on the subject I am quite certain the answer is no. I am assuming that the raw unmagnetized neodymium material has a very fat BH "S" curve. In other words it has a fat hysteresis loop and the area inside the hysteresis loop represents lost energy after you do a complete travel around the loop. It also would have very high remanence (also shown in the BH curve) and that's the last thing you want in an inductor core. You want the core to be made of a material that can easily be temporarily magnetized and just as easily give up all of that stored magnetic energy (low remanence) and go back to a neutral state, all with a minimal loss of energy.
From what I recall a Metglas core has next to zero remanence and very high permeability and they make it in ribbon-like spools that form insulated layers to keep eddy current losses to a bare minimum. I believe it's an expensive and exotic way to implement a core and as a result its very high in performance. One assumes that for more "mainstream" cores the standard core materials are still in use because they are much cheaper. Take this all with a grain of salt because I don't regularly scour the Internet reading up on cores.
Going back to using magnets in cores, a point that I made a few times is that the magnetization of the core can't by definition affect anything. The magnetization is a DC-type phenomenon and all the "action" is in the realm of AC. So the magnetization is invisible and has no affect on the AC circuit. You just end up with a magnet doing a lousy job as a core. You often see people posting, and you see free energy propositions, where people claim that using a magnet as a core means that the magnet will give an "extra kick" to the return energy but it's not true, it's just an old wives' tale. All that you have to do is build your circuit twice, one version with a proper core and the second version with a magnet as a core and compare them if you are the type that needs to prove these things for yourself. However, in this case, understanding all of the issues is ten times more important than building a test circuit.
MileHigh
@MH
Quote: Going back to using magnets in cores, a point that I made a few times is that the magnetization of the core can't by definition affect anything.
So i guess this being the case,i should ask as to why i am able to get a voltage out of the coil that is sitting 3/4 of an inch away from the toroid coil?.We can see(other than the phase shift due to high frequency)that it seems to be coupled to the pulsed input> Now this is an AC input,but i dont see that makeing a difference?.
If the fields are contained within the core,i should get nothing in the way of voltage in the secondary coil?.
A test thought.
If i take a standard toroid coil(non magnetised core)and place a magnet above the center,when applying a dc current to the toroid coil,the magnet above should have less attraction due to core saturation?. If i get a stronger pull on the PM when a dc current is applied,this could only mean an eminating magnetic field-correct?.
Just trying to think how we could test to see if there is an eminating magnetic field from the toroid.
Quote from: Farmhand on September 12, 2013, 09:46:46 PM
Yes Mr Eric Dollard is confused by toroidal transformer induction and says no one knows how it happens. ;D So I linked that PDF at EF maybe over 1 year ago. ;) In response to mbrowne.
Although I think it is theoretical.
I think bench tests are in order.
Cheers
Yes, tests. ;)
When we consider how 1 wire can induce another wire using Ac or pulse input, then why would we ignore it within a transformer? ;) When I see vids on YT on the subject or even in books(havnt read them all) they tend to show a core, primary and secondary and depict magnetic field lines in the cores. But I dont see much about how that field, locked in the core(lets say most of it) produced by the primary, induces current in the secondary. Its like they skip that part and what they show is all there is to know apparently. ::) That pdf I posted gives those answers, and those answers explain clearly how that mutual induction works within a toroid or any other transformer with a closed loop core.
One experiment that might be interesting is to just have 2 wires, a primary and a secondary of particular length laying next to each other and pulse the primary while reading the secondary. Then get a bunch of toroids stacked almost the length of the wires and run the 2 wires through the cores where we have the ends of the wires coming out of each end of the core stack and redo those tests to see if there is a difference.
I have a 10 pack of linear hall sensors coming from China. Will see what we can see. ;)
Mags
Quote from: tinman on September 13, 2013, 08:27:19 AM
@MH
Quote: Going back to using magnets in cores, a point that I made a few times is that the magnetization of the core can't by definition affect anything.
So i guess this being the case,i should ask as to why i am able to get a voltage out of the coil that is sitting 3/4 of an inch away from the toroid coil?.We can see(other than the phase shift due to high frequency)that it seems to be coupled to the pulsed input> Now this is an AC input,but i dont see that makeing a difference?.
If the fields are contained within the core,i should get nothing in the way of voltage in the secondary coil?.
A test thought.
If i take a standard toroid coil(non magnetised core)and place a magnet above the center,when applying a dc current to the toroid coil,the magnet above should have less attraction due to core saturation?. If i get a stronger pull on the PM when a dc current is applied,this could only mean an eminating magnetic field-correct?.
Just trying to think how we could test to see if there is an eminating magnetic field from the toroid.
Hey Tin
If your core is a magnet, then thats why you get output from a coil near the toroid coil.
The magnet has a field that can reach the pickup coil. Then when you pulse the toroid coil, it alters the magnet(core) field from normal to the altered field, thus giving you output in your pickup coil due to the flexing of the magnets field. ;) ;D Use a normal core and you should not get much of anything from the pickup, unless the core becomes saturated due to large input that produces a field so strong that it cant hold anymore, so the excess field expands outward to induce the pickup coil.
As for "If i take a standard toroid coil(non magnetised core)and place a magnet above the center,when applying a dc current to the toroid coil,the magnet above should have less attraction due to core saturation?."
This is the concept of Steorn's Orbo motor. My Orbonbon solid state Orbo uses the same concept of controlling a cores attraction ability to direct a magnets field elsewhere in order to induce a field in a pickup coil. Here is a vid of my tiny toroid orbo. The magnets of the rotor are attracted to the toroid core, and when the toroid coil is pulsed, just when the mag is right at the core, the coil saturates the core and lets the magnet pass by. ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrtGzxOKpwQ
And here is the Orbonbon vid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES00DfhHH-U
The Orbonbon has a core in a core, where the inner core is wound with a pickup coil around the circumference of the inner bead core. Then I wind that inner bead core with a toroid winding also.
Pulsing the toroid winding has little affect on the pickup coil, I have a few vids on this, but when I insert magnets in the inner core, those N and S fields of the magnets are attracted to the inner core due to proximity. Then when we pulse the toroid coil, the inner core saturates and the magnets are not attracted to it anymore and the fields jump to the outer core, in which the flux 'cuts' the pickup coil. Then when the pulse is over, the flux jumps back to the inner core, due to shortest path, and it induces the pickup coil again causing an opposite output as the flux cuts the pickup coil again, only inward this time. So we get a positive pulse out when the toroid coil is energized, and neg out when the toroid pulse drops. ;) ;D
Mags
wake up
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Andersen_AETHER_CONTROL_via_an_understanding_of_ORTHOGONAL_FIELDS.pdf
Here is another oddity found today,while looking into field strength over P/in of the rotor of the new high powered pulse motor project-the Altipulse.
Now we all know how an alternator works-right?.
Well in this video,i seem to be missing one polarity of the magnetic field???.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5nrlGpCB9I
Tinman:
Quotewhy i am able to get a voltage out of the coil that is sitting 3/4 of an inch away from the toroid coil?
It's because the main coil is actually two coils in one. The main toroidal coil is one coil and the the single big loop of the entire toroidal coil is another coil - a single turn coil. There are no fields of any significance radiating from the main toroidal coil. The coupling you are seeing is between your pick-up coil and the single big loop. That looks like two coils on the same center axis facing each other, N turns of your pick-up coil and one turn of your driving coil. It's an N:1 air core transformer with a 3/4 inch gap between the coils.
QuoteWe can see(other than the phase shift due to high frequency)that it seems to be coupled to the pulsed input
The phase shift looks like it is nearly exactly 90 degrees, and that could be significant. With an N:1 air core transformer coupling a signal between the two coils there should be no phase shift. I can't explain any more beyond that.
One possibility is that your excitation frequency is very high and the coil is not functioning like a coil anymore, and the parasitic capacitance has taken over. If I were in your shoes I would do a frequency sweep and observe what happens to the phase shifts and current amplitudes to figure out what is going on.
QuoteIf i take a standard toroid coil(non magnetised core)and place a magnet above the center,when applying a dc current to the toroid coil,the magnet above should have less attraction due to core saturation?. If i get a stronger pull on the PM when a dc current is applied,this could only mean an eminating magnetic field-correct?.
Yes you should get less attraction due to core saturation. However, you have the field generated from the toroid like I mentioned above, where toroid does generate a magnetic field from the equivalent single-turn coil. That will cause attraction or repulsion. So there will be two effects happening at the same time. Also, the degree of perceived saturation from the point of view of the magnet may be different if the magnet is above the toroid as compared to if the magnet is on the side of the toroid. It also will depend on how how much current is flowing through the toroidal coil. How do you know how much current is required to saturate the core? Maybe the core will only be 90% saturated as an example.
Everything has direction when playing with magnetic fields. I suspect that when the magnet is above the toroid that the perceived degree of saturation will be less as compared to when the magnet is on the side of the toroid. That's because there is perhaps more of an opportunity to "bend" the direction of the magnetic domains as compared to when the magnet is beside the toroid. I have never done any of this stuff, I am just trying to crunch this in my head.
QuoteHere is another oddity found today,while looking into field strength over P/in of the rotor of the new high powered pulse motor project-the Altipulse.
Now we all know how an alternator works-right?.
Well in this video,i seem to be missing one polarity of the magnetic field???.
This looks like nothing more than current steering with diodes and two sets of coils. So how do you check for the presence of the diodes?
MileHigh
Wake up indeed.
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Andersen_AETHER_CONTROL_via_an_understanding_of_ORTHOGONAL_FIELDS.pdf (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Andersen_AETHER_CONTROL_via_an_understanding_of_ORTHOGONAL_FIELDS.pdf)
Take a bunch of toroids and stack them all you want and they will not negate the force of gravity in any way. These "drive by" links that don't have anything to really contribute to the discussion are tedious.
@MH
Quote: This looks like nothing more than current steering with diodes and two sets of coils. So how do you check for the presence of the diodes?
This is just a standard alternator electromagnetic rotor setup. There is no diodes in the rotor coil,as it is powered by a DC current-normal setup. Where i have the P/in going,is just each end of the coil.
It is a bit strange,but at a higher p/in to the coil,the effect starts to go away,and both fields become apparent.Just found it a bit odd,so thought i would post it.
Timnan:
I don't recognize that motor(?) configuration at all. Are we looking at what is normally an AC alternator, a DC generator, or is it normally an AC motor or a DC motor? What kind of equipment is it from?
I am not so clear on how you normally power this device. (If it is powered) I see the two slip rings. If you apply power to the slip rings do you apply AC or DC?
MileHigh
Tinman:
QuoteThere is no diodes in the rotor coil,as it is powered by a DC current-normal setup.
That's not what your clip is indicating when you flip the polarity. From what I can see your clip shows all the indications that there are two separate coils and there is current steering into the coils with diodes unless I am missing something or unaware of something. So I am challenging you and your buddies here and possibly your buddies on your own forum to figure out what is going on with that device. How to test for the presence of diodes would be a key part of the investigation.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on September 14, 2013, 11:51:27 AM
Wake up indeed.
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Andersen_AETHER_CONTROL_via_an_understanding_of_ORTHOGONAL_FIELDS.pdf (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Andersen_AETHER_CONTROL_via_an_understanding_of_ORTHOGONAL_FIELDS.pdf)
Take a bunch of toroids and stack them all you want and they will not negate the force of gravity in any way. These "drive by" links that don't have anything to really contribute to the discussion are tedious.
you couldnt see the truth if it slapped you up side the head
That's great "proof" there Dave45, a glass container filled with ice. Is your next step going to be designing an infinitely impossible anti-gravity drive just like on the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?
Webby1:
QuoteWhat if the core for a toroid was not a closed loop? Could you then measure the current and factor in the "lossy" state of the core?
I have a testbed or 4 that are setup this way and there is a field emanating from it as well as one can be introduced as such to generate an output from the winding, so I am thinking this is not a "valid" way to test."
I am honestly not sure what the context is for your first two questions. Can you elaborate a bit?
MileHigh
The A vector field can be spun........... if you know how
Hey Dave
How much power goes into your coil when you freeze the water? Is it AC? Have you tried it with just a magnet?
Mags
Quote from: tinman on September 14, 2013, 04:34:19 AM
Here is another oddity found today,while looking into field strength over P/in of the rotor of the new high powered pulse motor project-the Altipulse.
Now we all know how an alternator works-right?.
Well in this video,i seem to be missing one polarity of the magnetic field???.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5nrlGpCB9I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5nrlGpCB9I)
What a great effect you are showing here. ;) I wonder if a speaker magnet would do the same. If a speaker magnet did not cause the effect, then possibly a speaker magnet would work better.
What your video shows is that there is a difference between S and N poles possibly when using a coil as compared to a magnet, or, there is an effect going on with the outer circumference of the coil and the pole fingers that is not commonly known. The speaker magnet test would be a step in the right direction. There are vids on YT that show how to take apart the armature to remove the coil to install magnets. If there is a difference and the magnet causes the screw driver to be attracted to N and S fingers, then the coil has different attributes than a magnet of similar size and shape. I know they do, but the effect you show, Im not familiar with and it interests me. ;) Thanks for showing.
Mags
The reason they dont use magnets instead of coils is the regulating of the output is done by the regulator adjusting the voltage to the armature coil. Recent years there are permanent mags in alternators, as rare earths can handle some heat and the regulation is controlled at the output.
I just showed you the secret of the ages and you dont even realize it ;D ;D ;D
tinman,
I have worked with toroids and magnetic field theory for over 30 years and I have always found the description given in the link suggested by MileHigh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)
to be correct. This is the standard physics/electronic engineering theory approach. The PDF suggested by Magluvin
http://www.overunity.com/13802/magnetic-fields-within-a-toroid-inductor/dlattach/attach/127516/ (http://www.overunity.com/13802/magnetic-fields-within-a-toroid-inductor/dlattach/attach/127516/)
gives a simpler explanation that is also correct.
These explanations may not be the ultimate truth, but they have been used successfully by physics and electronic engineers for many years.
I recently posted a video you may find interesting about flux cancellation that has experimental tests showing magnetic field cancellation in a toroid (however, I admit it was not easy to understand):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc9bt5Yo0H8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc9bt5Yo0H8)
Keep on trucken
Tinman:
I did a little bit of hunting around and now know that you were looking at the rotor of an alternator (Just like you stated but for some reason it didn't register with me at first). In the schematics I looked at I did not see any rotors that had two separate energizing circuits for the North and South finger pole electromagnet coils so it's still a mystery to me. I see how a voltage regulator circuit governs the amount of DC current that goes into the rotor electromagnets via the slip rings and that will then determine the rectified voltage output from the stator windings.
Good doc: http://www.autoshop101.com/forms/alt_bwoh.pdf (http://www.autoshop101.com/forms/alt_bwoh.pdf)
Good graphic: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads9/mot_alt1168989977.gif (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads9/mot_alt1168989977.gif)
If anything there are lots of diodes, but I can't explain your screwdriver test. I can only suspect that there are some diodes embedded in your rotor as per the diodes you see that allow the stator to take over the job of energizing the rotor electromagnets once the alternator is spinning. Perhaps for some reason there are separate circuits to energize the North and South finger poles in the particular rotor you were examining. However, that still doesn't explain the effect you see when you reverse the polarity. Although when you think about it, I am assuming that the polarity for the voltage on the slip rings is not supposed to be reversed.
I was the type of kid that opened up everything to see how it ticked.
MileHigh
Quote from: Magluvin on September 11, 2013, 10:39:53 PM
I strongly disagree. :P
There are fields in that open area.
Mags,
Correct, but it is not a magnetic field.
Quote
Lets take the toroid diagram in the vid and make it a transformer. Primary on the left and secondary on the right. Now, if the primary induces a field in the core, how does the secondary get induced if the field is only in the core? ???
It's quite easy to understand how, but you first have to understand that a changing flux (B-field) creates a changing electric E-field, which is at 90º. Second you need to be aware that the E-field is present both inside and outside the toroid. Third, you need to understand that it is actually the E-field which is responsible for both self and mutual induction. Fourth, the B-field inside the core is conducted from the primary through to the secondary due to the high permeability core.
Quote
The field of the primary has to 'cut' the windings of the secondary.
When using a toroid core, no it is not required. What is required is that the flux created in the core by the primary, must go through the center of the windings of the secondary, the same way you can make a transformer by placing two coils side-by-side on a rod core.
Quote
If you put a wire through the very center of the toroid opening,not even touching any toroid windings or the core, you will get current induced into that wire from an input to the toroidal coil. So how can that be, if the field is only in the core? ??? ?
It is not only normal for this to be the result, but it is required. It must occur. But as I mentioned, you must be aware of and carefully consider the E-field in this interaction. When you see this, it is simple and obvious.
Ask questions if you are still not clear on what I'm saying.
Dave45:
You are certainly welcome to add some substance to your pictures and just state in plain language what you are alluding to. To be honest you are showing the same pattern that we see from BruceTPU and Jbignes5. It's the pattern of dropping comments and hints that imply that you guys are "in the know" and "big things are coming" but there is never any substantive information provided to back up the hints and the teases. I am challenging you to break that pattern.
QuoteThe A vector field can be spun........... if you know how
What do you mean and how do you do it? Please share your knowledge because you are implying that you know something that we don't. What is that knowledge? Please don't make a comment that's just another hint or a tease.
You show a picture of a spool of wire with some funky windings. What is that spool for? Why are the windings like that? What are your expectations with that design? Have you made any measurements? What are the measurements? How did you make them? What do they mean? What are the input signals and what are the output signals? If you are working with a power output vs. power input scenario, what is the power source and what is the load that you use for your output power measurement? Precisely how do you make your input power measurement and precisely how do you make your output power measurement? I am asking you for straight facts if you have them, and not some link to some Tom Bearden stuff or some other page filled with alternative theory.
Please just give us the real deal without any smoke and mirrors if you really have something.
Thanks,
MileHigh
Quote from: poynt99 on September 14, 2013, 09:00:08 PM
Mags,
Correct, but it is not a magnetic field.
It's quite easy to understand how, but you first have to understand that a changing flux (B-field) creates a changing electric E-field, which is at 90º. Second you need to be aware that the E-field is present both inside and outside the toroid. Third, you need to understand that it is actually the E-field which is responsible for both self and mutual induction. Fourth, the B-field inside the core is conducted from the primary through to the secondary due to the high permeability core.
When using a toroid core, no it is not required. What is required is that the flux created in the core by the primary, must go through the center of the windings of the secondary, the same way you can make a transformer by placing two coils side-by-side on a rod core.
It is not only normal for this to be the result, but it is required. It must occur. But as I mentioned, you must be aware of and carefully consider the E-field in this interaction. When you see this, it is simple and obvious.
Ask questions if you are still not clear on what I'm saying.
Hey Poynt
So are you saying that the transfer of induction between the primary and secondary on a toroid core is via the E-field, not 'electromagnetic induction' ?
Is the E-field a product of the magnetic field, not a product of voltage applied to the coil?
"What is required is that the flux created in the core by the primary, must go through the center of the windings of the secondary, the same way you can make a transformer by placing two coils side-by-side on a rod core."
When you say "through the center of the windings", do you mean that flux in the inner area of the toroid core. cuts across that area to cross the secondary?
Thanks ;)
Mags
Quote from: xee2 on September 14, 2013, 05:08:20 PM
tinman,
I have worked with toroids and magnetic field theory for over 30 years and I have always found the description given in the link suggested by MileHigh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)
to be correct. This is the standard physics/electronic engineering theory approach. The PDF suggested by Magluvin
http://www.overunity.com/13802/magnetic-fields-within-a-toroid-inductor/dlattach/attach/127516/ (http://www.overunity.com/13802/magnetic-fields-within-a-toroid-inductor/dlattach/attach/127516/)
gives a simpler explanation that is also correct.
These explanations may not be the ultimate truth, but they have been used successfully by physics and electronic engineers for many years.
I recently posted a video you may find interesting about flux cancellation that has experimental tests showing magnetic field cancellation in a toroid (however, I admit it was not easy to understand):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc9bt5Yo0H8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc9bt5Yo0H8)
Hi xee2
Thanks for the video.
As you have shown,it seems that those that argue there case,are infact showing much the same thing-I think MH actualy pointed this out some time back.
I have a new thought on a toroid transformer,based around the given information here on this thread. So i will cast a metglass core today,and wind it tomorrow-and see what happen's.
Quote from: poynt99 on September 14, 2013, 09:00:08 PM
Mags,
Correct, but it is not a magnetic field.
It's quite easy to understand how, but you first have to understand that a changing flux (B-field) creates a changing electric E-field, which is at 90º. Second you need to be aware that the E-field is present both inside and outside the toroid. Third, you need to understand that it is actually the E-field which is responsible for both self and mutual induction. Fourth, the B-field inside the core is conducted from the primary through to the secondary due to the high permeability core.
When using a toroid core, no it is not required. What is required is that the flux created in the core by the primary, must go through the center of the windings of the secondary, the same way you can make a transformer by placing two coils side-by-side on a rod core.
It is not only normal for this to be the result, but it is required. It must occur. But as I mentioned, you must be aware of and carefully consider the E-field in this interaction. When you see this, it is simple and obvious.
Ask questions if you are still not clear on what I'm saying.
8) A vector field
Quote from: Magluvin on September 14, 2013, 09:41:40 PM
Hey Poynt
So are you saying that the transfer of induction between the primary and secondary on a toroid core is via the E-field, not 'electromagnetic induction' ?
The idea is to understand that there is a changing (increasing and decreasing) B-field within the core. This changing B-field is created by the primary coil and is "conducted" all the way around the core by the core material. Since the secondary happens to be in the direct path of this changing B-field, the resulting changing E-field around the secondary (in the same plane) causes the secondary induced emf.
Quote
Is the E-field a product of the magnetic field, not a product of voltage applied to the coil?
Correct. The E-field is a product of the changing magnetic field. The changing magnetic field from the primary is caused by current in the primary, which of course is caused by voltage applied to the primary coil.
Quote
When you say "through the center of the windings", do you mean that flux in the inner area of the toroid core. cuts across that area to cross the secondary?
I mean that the flux "travels" around via the core to the secondary, where it goes through the "hole" of the secondary coil.
There is an E-field produced at every point around the toroid (perpendicular to the B-field), no matter if there is a coil situated there or not. When we properly place a coil in the path of the B-field, the coil "intercepts" the resulting E-field and hence has an emf induced in its windings.
Quote from: poynt99 on September 14, 2013, 11:36:13 PM
The idea is to understand that there is a changing (increasing and decreasing) B-field within the core. This changing B-field is created by the primary coil and is "conducted" all the way around the core by the core material. Since the secondary happens to be in the direct path of this changing B-field, the resulting changing E-field around the secondary (in the same plane) causes the secondary induced emf.
Correct. The E-field is a product of the changing magnetic field. The changing magnetic field from the primary is caused by current in the primary, which of course is caused by voltage applied to the primary coil.
I mean that the flux "travels" around via the core to the secondary, where it goes through the "hole" of the secondary coil.
There is an E-field produced at every point around the toroid (perpendicular to the B-field), no matter if there is a coil situated there or not. When we properly place a coil in the path of the B-field, the coil "intercepts" the resulting E-field and hence has an emf induced in its windings.
Hey Poynt
Have you read the pdf I posted? I put it here again.
When you have time. If you havnt, please check it out. It makes a lot of sense.
When a wire has a rising voltage imposed upon it, a B field expands around the wire. So in our primary, the individual wires are the origin of the magnetic field produced by input. So why is that not the case with a toroid transformer, or any other closed core transformers? How could ther not be any flux outside of the core in those windings, where the flux originates? ;)
If you havnt read the pdf, give it a gander. ;D 18 pages. Let me know what you think.
Thanks
Mags
Hmmm, just thought of a good example. Hopefully. ;D
If we have a straight rod core with a coil wrapped around it, we can understand that the inner parts of the flux loops of the coil will be in the core and out of the ends, they loop out expaded in space/air.
Now lets take a C shaped core and wind just on the left of the C, in the middle leaving some length of the core, top and bottom of the C without wire on it. Now imagine, from what you know, what do the fields look like now? There should be much stronger flux between the upper and lower C core legs, and then anything outside of the C as a whole is less dense.
So now, we close off the C core into a toroid. Can we not see that the flux crosses over the open space inside the toroid hole as the field expands from the primary?
Mags
Mags.
I read Distini ages ago, and I re-read some of the one you posted. I think he has some incorrect notions.
The B-field around the individual wires combine to form a concentrated field within the core. Beyond the surface of the wire itself, there is very little flux.
Build a toroid coil and get a Hall sensor to test it out yourself.
Quote from: poynt99 on September 15, 2013, 12:14:12 AM
Mags.
I read Distini ages ago, and I re-read some of the one you posted. I think he has some incorrect notions.
The B-field around the individual wires combine to form a concentrated field within the core. Beyond the surface of the wire itself, there is very little flux.
Build a toroid coil and get a Hall sensor to test it out yourself.
I got some hall sensors coming this week. ;D
Thanks for your time Poynt. ;)
Mags
So am i right in understanding that the current loop is strongest at the center of the toroid core? or is it the magnetic field that is strongest at the center of the core-or both?.
The B field and A field are two seperate fields, when you understand this things start to make sense. All the nonsense about particles popping in and out of dimensions is ludicrous.
If current is moving away from you in a wire the A field is coming towards you, the A field moves opposite the applied current, when I say current direction I mean neg to pos.
Using a single toroid the A field will loop the toroid but using two toroids the A fields of both toroids will join and loop both toroids, if wound and connected right.
The A field can also be spun between the two toroids if the winding is wound as I have showed.
If you look at the pic of the solenoid froze in ice you can see the A field. I have seen this field spinning in my ice experiments using a toroid,it creates a vortex.
Once you understand this concept you can see exactly how Ed leedskalnin's PMH works, there is a magnetic field flowing in the toroid and an electric field flowing in the air looping through the toroid, as long as the magnetic field is not interrupted the fields will continue for years, but when the magnetic field is broken the electric field collapses into the coils and will light a bulb. There are quite a few vids on youtube showing this effect.
simple simple simple
Ac reverses the magnetic field within a toroid this change in magnetic field direction causes the electric field to collapse into the secondary and we get a transformer. simple simple simple
Quote from: tinman on September 15, 2013, 02:04:16 AM
So am i right in understanding that the current loop is strongest at the center of the toroid core? or is it the magnetic field that is strongest at the center of the core-or both?.
The current is the same everywhere in the wire. The magnetic field is strongest inside the toroid along a circle whose points are at the centers of the cross-sections of the toroid. In the same way that the magnetic field is strongest along the center line of a solenoid coil. The toroid coil is like a solenoid coil bent into a circle.
EDIT 1: Theoretically the field inside the toroid is uniform, not stronger in the center because the toroid is like an infinitely long solenoid.
EDIT 2: MileHigh has pointed out that this still is not correct, the magnetic field is strongest at the inner edge of the toroid because the toroid does not have equal length sides like a solenoid.
Quote from: tinman on September 15, 2013, 02:04:16 AM
So am i right in understanding that the current loop is strongest at the center of the toroid core? or is it the magnetic field that is strongest at the center of the core-or both?.
I'm not sure what you mean Brad.
By "current loop" do you mean the secondary winding?
By "center of the toroid core" do you mean the center of the "doughnut hole" or the center of the toroid core cross-section?
See also xee2's post, above.
Xee2:
QuoteThe magnetic field is strongest inside the toroid along a circle whose points are at the centers of the cross-sections of the toroid. In the same way that the magnetic field is strongest along the center line of a solenoid coil. The toroid coil is like a solenoid coil bent into a circle.
Unfortunately that's not correct. Please have a look at the clip I linked to again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM
MileHigh
The magnetic field is strongest closest to the center (see pic) but the magnetic field is contained and really is of no concern other than using it to control the electric field.
Quote from: MileHigh on September 15, 2013, 09:53:32 AM
Xee2:
Unfortunately that's not correct. Please have a look at the clip I linked to again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)
MileHigh
MH,
xee2 is correct. He is referring to the cross-section of the toroid "tube", not the doughnut hole of the toroid.
Poynt:
QuoteHe is referring to the cross-section of the toroid "tube", not the doughnut hole of the toroid.
I know that he is referring to the cross-section of the tube. The magnetic field is strongest inside the toroid tube along a circle whose points are hugging the
inside wall (closest to the center of the doughnut) of the cross-section of the toroid.
B = u
0*N*I/2*Pi*r
The magnetic field strength inside a toroid (center of toroid when sliced like a bagel) is proportional to the number of turns and the current, and
inversely proportional to the distance from the center of the doughnut.
The above formula is for an air core. For the case when there is a ferromagnetic core, just multiply it by the relative permeability of the core material.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on September 15, 2013, 09:53:32 AM
Xee2:
Unfortunately that's not correct. Please have a look at the clip I linked to again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCSHcftPAIM)
MileHigh
If your point is that the field is uniform inside the toroid, I agree. I was trying to show that it was centered inside of the toroid and got sloppy. For an infinitely long solendoid, the field is uniform inside the solendoid. And, since a toroid is like a solelnoid bent into a circle, the toroid is like an infinitely long solenoid since it has no ends. Therefore, the field inside the toroid is uniform and is not stronger at center than at edges. Is that what you were pointing out? Is there something else that was wrong?
That's true. However, the "dl" factor tells us that the integral of B around the full toroid loop should be the same within the inner and outer radius.
If the radius of the toroid is >> than the radius of the cross-section, then the B-field intensity inside the toroid core will, for practical purposes be constant from the inner to outer radius.
Quote from: poynt99 on September 15, 2013, 10:57:58 AM
That's true. However, the "dl" factor tells us that the integral of B around the full toroid loop should be the same within the inner and outer radius.
If the radius of the toroid is >> than the radius of the cross-section, then the B-field intensity inside the toroid core will, for practical purposes be constant from the inner to outer radius.
?? If you draw the line integral anywhere inside the toroid will it not always enclose the same amount of current?
Yes. That was my point.
However, in a toroid, if you did have a very small Hall sensor that you could insert inside the toroid core at any radius, we would see a stronger reading at the inside radius vs. the outside radius.
Ok,i was refering to the cross section center of the core itself-not the air hole in the middle of the toroid.
So if the magnetic field is strongest within the core itself,why dont we put the secondary coil in the center of the core?,rather than around the outside with the primary winding, like a standard transformer. Dose anyone know what would happen with the secondary placed inside the core itself?. Would this reduce or remove any BackEMF that would effect the primary?.
There is another thing about the toroid coil that may answer another debate that was raised in another thread(MH will know this one im talking about) It is in reguards to this bloch wall claim.If it exist within a PM or EM,then it must exist in all PM's and EM's. So when we pass current through a toriod inductor,where exactly would this bloch wall be? Is the toroid the perfect example of magnetic fields looping around a magnet,without this bloch wall?
Xee2:
QuoteIf your point is that the field is uniform inside the toroid
My point is that the field is not uniform inside the toroid. The field inside the toroid is stronger the closer you go towards the center of the toroid.
QuoteFor an infinitely long solendoid, the field is uniform inside the solendoid.
I agree, and that's a nice little thought experiment that proves that the field is uniform inside an infinitely long solenoid. You just keep making the radius of the toroid larger and larger until you get a straight line.
Poynt:
QuoteIf the radius of the toroid is >> than the radius of the cross-section, then the B-field intensity inside the toroid core will, for practical purposes be constant from the inner to outer radius.
Yes but on the bench we normally work with toroids that are typically "doughnut sized" and the formula from the clip is relevant to bench work.
It also makes sense intuitively. When you are hugging the inside wall of the toroidal cross section, the density of the wire loops per tangential centimeter is the highest. So you would think that the magnetic field would be stronger where there is a higher wire loop density (as compared to the outside wall of the toroid where the wire loop density per tangential centimeter is lower.)
MileHigh
Mags and tinman,
Forget about toroid coils for a moment, and consider this thought experiment.
If you had a very long solenoid coil, say 1" in diameter and 1 mile long, wound evenly along the entire length of the solenoid, and you energized the solenoid. Would you be able to detect any magnetic field anywhere around the solenoid, other than at the ends or within its core?
In other words, if you were standing 2640 feet from one end of the solenoid, and you had a Hall sensor with you, would you detect any magnetic field anywhere near the solenoid (assuming you could not probe inside it)?
Xee2:
Quote?? If you draw the line integral anywhere inside the toroid will it not always enclose the same amount of current?
Yes but if the summation of all of the dl's is larger then the B has to be smaller because there is a constant amount of current inside the dl loop.
So that's telling you the larger the dl loop the smaller B has to be. (no pun intended lol)
MileHigh
Quote from: tinman on September 15, 2013, 11:20:12 AM
Ok,i was refering to the cross section center of the core itself-not the air hole in the middle of the toroid.
So if the magnetic field is strongest within the core itself,why dont we put the secondary coil in the center of the core?,rather than around the outside with the primary winding, like a standard transformer. Dose anyone know what would happen with the secondary placed inside the core itself?. Would this reduce or remove any BackEMF that would effect the primary?.
Brad, in theory it does not matter how loosely the secondary is wound on the core, as long as it loops completely around it. Remember, it is not the magnetic field that induces the emf in the secondary, it is the resulting electric field which does. And this electric E-field emanates from the center of the core outward to OUTSIDE the core itself.
Quote
There is another thing about the toroid coil that may answer another debate that was raised in another thread(MH will know this one im talking about) It is in reguards to this bloch wall claim.If it exist within a PM or EM,then it must exist in all PM's and EM's. So when we pass current through a toriod inductor,where exactly would this bloch wall be? Is the toroid the perfect example of magnetic fields looping around a magnet,without this bloch wall?
There is no Bloch wall in a regular PM or EM. And this includes a toroid coil; there is no Bloch wall there either.
Quote from: tinman on September 11, 2013, 10:01:30 AM
So what dose the magnetic field look like within a toroid coil?. Is the magnetic field contained within the toroid core?,and wich field is it-north or south?.
My first test looking at a field being expelled outward from the toroid coil.But listen carefuly to the video near the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNOtEDkCSpA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNOtEDkCSpA)
Hi,
Very interesting!!
Does anyone know why the induced voltage into the external coil has an exact 90º phase shift ? Could you test what happens at lower frequencies as 60 Hz or so?
Is is possible that you are getting in that video another type of induction?
Quote from: MileHigh on September 15, 2013, 11:28:25 AM
Xee2:
Yes but if the summation of all of the dl's is larger then the B has to be smaller because there is a constant amount of current inside the dl loop.
So that's telling you the larger the dl loop the smaller B has to be. (no pun intended lol)
MileHigh
MileHigh,I think I see your point. Since the toroid walls are not parallel like a solenoid, the magnetic field will be stronger near the inner edge of the toroid than near the outer edged of toroid. Thanks for the corrections. I hope I have it correct now.
Quote from: poynt99 on September 15, 2013, 11:24:10 AM
Mags and tinman,
Forget about toroid coils for a moment, and consider this thought experiment.
If you had a very long solenoid coil, say 1" in diameter and 1 mile long, wound evenly along the entire length of the solenoid, and you energized the solenoid. Would you be able to detect any magnetic field anywhere around the solenoid, other than at the ends or within its core?
In other words, if you were standing 2640 feet from one end of the solenoid, and you had a Hall sensor with you, would you detect any magnetic field anywhere near the solenoid (assuming you could not probe inside it)?
Well i believe that the fields must always loop from one end of the magnet(inductor) to the other,so a magnetic field should be detectable along the outside. The same go's for any length of straight wire that has current passing through it,there will be a magnetic field along that wire.If we look at the power line's that deliver our power to our home's,we know we can light a CFL from the magnetic radiation from those wires. The wires are also twisted to form loops,like that of an inductor-only the twists arnt as tight as they are in an inductor.
Quote from: poynt99 on September 15, 2013, 11:34:54 AM
There is no Bloch wall in a regular PM or EM. And this includes a toroid coil; there is no Bloch wall there either.
Thank you point,and i was with you on this one.MH tried for some time to show this to other's,but-well lets just say,they love there bloch walls.
Quote from: hanon on September 15, 2013, 11:50:44 AM
Hi,
Very interesting!!
Does anyone know why the induced voltage into the external coil has an exact 90º phase shift ? Could you test what happens at lower frequencies as 60 Hz or so?
Is is possible that you are getting in that video another type of induction?
Hi hanon
I can shift the phase angle from 0 to 180* out,by varing the frequency.At low frequencies,there is no phase shift.Only from about 5KHz dose the phase start to shift. I dont think there is anything to it,but once i hit a 90* phase shift,is when i get maximum amplitude from the secondary.
Xee2:
Quoting you:
QuoteSince the toroid walls are not parallel like a solenoid, the magnetic field will be stronger near the inner edge of the toroid than near the outer edged of toroid.
Yes indeed, and for posterity I am attaching the screen cap of the clip that shows the formula.
Some people may not be comfortable with doing derivations. But for what it's worth the teacher that made all those wonderful clips I reference from time to time is excellent at doing and explaining derivations. The essence of a derivation is taking what looks like a very complex problem and reducing it all down to a simple formula.
Some people may also not be comfortable with interpreting formulas and shy away from them. But if you followed this thread and have a look at the formula in the attached screen capture and contemplate it, it may all come together.
If you look at the formula and the associated diagram in the screen cap and contemplate it for a while, you should be able to see that just the formula itself is telling you that the magnetic field strength is highest along the inside wall of the toroid.
MileHigh
Tinman:
QuoteI can shift the phase angle from 0 to 180* out,by varing the frequency.At low frequencies,there is no phase shift.Only from about 5KHz dose the phase start to shift. I dont think there is anything to it,but once i hit a 90* phase shift,is when i get maximum amplitude from the secondary.
You might recall that I stated that there should be no phase shift at lower frequencies. Below 5 KHz your toroidal coil was acting like a single-turn primary to the N-turn secondary of your pickup coil. This is due to the generation of a separate magnetic field that is not associated with the magnetic field that is generated inside the core.
You cannot ignore frequency effects when it comes to coils and capacitors but that is a whole other can of worms that's not for this thread.
MileHigh
Quote from: tinman on September 15, 2013, 12:05:06 PM
Well i believe that the fields must always loop from one end of the magnet(inductor) to the other,so a magnetic field should be detectable along the outside. The same go's for any length of straight wire that has current passing through it,there will be a magnetic field along that wire.If we look at the power line's that deliver our power to our home's,we know we can light a CFL from the magnetic radiation from those wires. The wires are also twisted to form loops,like that of an inductor-only the twists arnt as tight as they are in an inductor.
When the solenoid length is >> than the solenoid diameter, no there will not be a detectable B-field outside the solenoid when you are half way from one end. In fact this will be the case for 99.999% of the length of that 1 mile long solenoid. You WILL detect a B-field outside the solenoid when you are very near the ends.
And so it goes with a toroid. There are no open ends for the flux to "escape" and return, hence the B-field outside the toroid is practically zero. The return path is through the center itself because the solenoid makes a complete circle.
Webby1:
QuoteWhen I energize the copper coil, with a pulse, the coat hanger coil, aka the core, does produce a current. If I leave the ends open I can measure it.
It's not surprising that you get some kind of reaction from the coat hangar core when you pulse the outer copper toroid. Any core that is conductive will produce eddy currents when it is pulsed, as an example. Plus the ideal toroid configuration would have perfect symmetry, and any deviations from the symmetry will show up in your measurements as small detectable signals. So your setup will do that.
QuoteSo,, what I was getting at is, that this way the core is still a core maybe and then you could actually measure what the internal current is instead of using formulas.
In theory you would only see eddy currents in a conductive core when there is AC excitation of the real copper toroid coil. If you have a lot of experience on the bench you may have observed that a scope probe on high sensitivity will pick up a main signal in a circuit almost anywhere else in the circuit for all sorts of reasons; unexpected signal propagation in the circuit itself, coupling through stray capacitance and stray inductance, etc, etc.
MileHigh
Dave45:
QuoteIf you look at the pic of the solenoid froze in ice you can see the A field.
I have never in my life heard about immersing something in water and then freezing it into ice to visualize fields. Can you explain how that works?
QuoteOnce you understand this concept you can see exactly how Ed leedskalnin's PMH works, there is a magnetic field flowing in the toroid and an electric field flowing in the air looping through the toroid, as long as the magnetic field is not interrupted the fields will continue for years, but when the magnetic field is broken the electric field collapses into the coils and will light a bulb. There are quite a few vids on youtube showing this effect.
simple simple simple
I understand exactly how the PMH works, it's like a magnetic equivalent to a charged capacitor. There is no electric field in the air that loops through the toroidal form of a typical PMH. The only field at play is the magnetic field that is contained within the PMH. The PMH is basically a temporary magnet that loops back onto itself. Because it feeds back onto itself the temporary magnet can remain permanently magnetized as long as it is not disturbed.
From my personal perspective it's almost like there is a mini cult around the PMH and that's a real shame.
Quotebut when the magnetic field is broken the electric field collapses into the coils and will light a bulb. There are quite a few vids on youtube showing this effect. simple simple simple
It is simple but not like you state. Only when the magnetic field collapses do you get a brief electric field appearing and then disappearing that can light the light bulb. The electric field only exists for a brief amount of time. You are saying that it's always there and finally collapses when you break the magnetic field and that's not true.
As far as the A field goes, you are of course referring to an "Aether field." Sorry but there is no such thing. It's part of a belief system that has a life of its own and you are buying into it. Freezing water does not organize into ice around an A field, there are other explanations for how and why water freezes into ice in recognizable patterns that could be explained to you by people knowledgeable in that field. I did read how water is slightly diamagnetic and saw a cool picture of a frog floating in thin air though!
You did a drive-by posting linking to a pseudoscience document about toroids and alleged Aether fields. It really had nothing to do with Tinman's investigation but I thought I would still comment. I know people believe that it is raining down Aether particles and that's pushing on us to keep our feet on the ground. You can do the modelling like that and it will function just like gravity. But where do all the raining Aether particles go when they reach the center of the Earth? It's just pseudoscience as far as I am concerned. How come there are no experiments that I am aware of that document and show detection of "collisions" between Aether particles and our bodies to keep our feet on the ground? They can detect alpha particle collisions and neutrino collisions and neutron collisions, how come no detection of Aether particle collisions?
Did you see how we derived a formula for the magnetic field inside a toroid? It was just an application of Maxwell's equations. For this alleged A field, I would not be surprised if all that you have are sketches dreamed up by enthusiasts and a rough anecdotal "rule book" like you expressed in some of your postings. You can't mathematically model the alleged A field, nor can you measure it with anything. Like I said, the ice deal is a non starter as far as I am concerned.
QuoteI just showed you the secret of the ages and you dont even realize it
You can buy a tshirt that shows Maxwell's equations in differential and integral form - that's the secret of the ages revealed.
There has never been a legitimate demonstration of a bunch of stacked coils showing a reduction in the acceleration due to gravity. It's just a fantasy, all part of the belief system that you ascribe to. Even in the graphic the author says that it "may" work like he or she needs some kind of escape clause if they are ever seriously challenged.
MileHigh
Tinman:
Poynt made a very interesting comment:
QuoteWith no input current, the axis of the majority of the speaker magnet domains is in the vertical plane. When you apply some current to the coil, some or all of the magnet's domains will rotate towards the horizontal plane, and the degree to which they rotate will depend on the current, strength of the magnet, and frequency of the drive signal.
If you were to replace the core with a non-magnetized material, or use no core at all, you should find that most of the B-field is contained within the toroid, and you will have little to no signal in your pickup coil.
That's something that I didn't think of and it sounds reasonable. Supposing that instead of a magnet inside the coil there was an electromagnet. This is a thought experiment. With an electromagnet generating the magnetic field in the vertical plane, then when you put AC into the toroidal coil the vertical field generated by the electromagnet would not be affected at all.
I am going to disagree with Poynt when he says that when you replace the core with non-magnetized material that you will have little or no signal in your pick-up coil. I already explained why several times so I won't repeat it. Let's call my process the "secondary magnetic field" process.
Therefore in your current setup with the magnetized core, the pick coil may be responding to the disturbed magnetic field from the magnet, as well as the secondary magnetic field process.
You mentioned that at low frequencies that you saw no phase shift in the pick-up coil waveform. That suggests that the coil was responding as a coil.
Then you stated that at a higher frequency you got maximum amplitude with a 90 degree phase shift observed in the pick-up coil. There is a possible explanation for that. You hit this self-resonant frequency for the coil and the inductive reactance and the parasitic capacitive reactance cancelled each other out. That means the coil just looked like an ordinary wire with no inductance or capacitance. So you would get AC current through the coil at the self-resonant frequency and at the same time there would be no phase shift between the AC voltage excitation for the coil and the AC current flowing through the coil (normally it's 90 degrees). Under those conditions you would expect to see a 90 degree phase shift between your AC excitation waveform and the AC voltage waveform for the pick-up coil.
When you push the frequency even higher the capacitive reactance takes over and then you would expect to see a 180 degree phase shift between the AC excitation waveform and the AC voltage waveform for the pick-up coil. Under these conditions your toroidal inductor actually looks like a capacitor.
The standard caveat is that this would have to be checked and verified on the bench.
MileHigh
Finally, I will state a very easy way to visualize the secondary magnetic field with another example that was just recently mentioned by Poynt.
He talked about a mile-long straight inductor coil that was one inch in diameter. He said that for all practical intents and purposes the field is fully contained inside the tube of the coil. There is a "return magnetic field" outside the tube of the coil but it would be so weak as to be undetectable.
Imagine you have one ampere of current flowing through the mile-long straight coil. Now imagine you back away from the coil. 50 feet away, then 100 feet away, then 500 feet away.
From 500 feet away the one-inch-diameter coil looks just like an ordinary straight wire with one ampere of current flowing through it. You know that a straight wire with one amp of current flowing through it will have a cylindrical magnetic field wrapped around it. So it's the same thing for the one-mile-long one-inch-diameter coil. It will also have a cylindrical magnetic field wrapped around it. That's the secondary field that I am talking about. So the same process happens with a toroidal coil also.
MileHigh
You just keep following the same old dogma as for me Im headed for free energy with a clear understanding of how it works, There's alot of things I havent shown but it wouldnt do any good anyway, Youv never experimented with the ice so how do you know what it can or cant do, you will see.
Quote from: MileHigh on September 15, 2013, 04:59:29 PM
Dave45:
I have never in my life heard about immersing something in water and then freezing it into ice to visualize fields. Can you explain how that works?
I understand exactly how the PMH works, it's like a magnetic equivalent to a charged capacitor. There is no electric field in the air that loops through the toroidal form of a typical PMH. The only field at play is the magnetic field that is contained within the PMH. The PMH is basically a temporary magnet that loops back onto itself. Because it feeds back onto itself the temporary magnet can remain permanently magnetized as long as it is not disturbed.
From my personal perspective it's almost like there is a mini cult around the PMH and that's a real shame.
It is simple but not like you state. Only when the magnetic field collapses do you get a brief electric field appearing and then disappearing that can light the light bulb. The electric field only exists for a brief amount of time. You are saying that it's always there and finally collapses when you break the magnetic field and that's not true.
As far as the A field goes, you are of course referring to an "Aether field." Sorry but there is no such thing. It's part of a belief system that has a life of its own and you are buying into it. Freezing water does not organize into ice around an A field, there are other explanations for how and why water freezes into ice in recognizable patterns that could be explained to you by people knowledgeable in that field. I did read how water is slightly diamagnetic and saw a cool picture of a frog floating in thin air though!
You did a drive-by posting linking to a pseudoscience document about toroids and alleged Aether fields. It really had nothing to do with Tinman's investigation but I thought I would still comment. I know people believe that it is raining down Aether particles and that's pushing on us to keep our feet on the ground. You can do the modelling like that and it will function just like gravity. But where do all the raining Aether particles go when they reach the center of the Earth? It's just pseudoscience as far as I am concerned. How come there are no experiments that I am aware of that document and show detection of "collisions" between Aether particles and our bodies to keep our feet on the ground? They can detect alpha particle collisions and neutrino collisions and neutron collisions, how come no detection of Aether particle collisions?
Did you see how we derived a formula for the magnetic field inside a toroid? It was just an application of Maxwell's equations. For this alleged A field, I would not be surprised if all that you have are sketches dreamed up by enthusiasts and a rough anecdotal "rule book" like you expressed in some of your postings. You can't mathematically model the alleged A field, nor can you measure it with anything. Like I said, the ice deal is a non starter as far as I am concerned.
You can buy a tshirt that shows Maxwell's equations in differential and integral form - that's the secret of the ages revealed.
There has never been a legitimate demonstration of a bunch of stacked coils showing a reduction in the acceleration due to gravity. It's just a fantasy, all part of the belief system that you ascribe to. Even in the graphic the author says that it "may" work like he or she needs some kind of escape clause if they are ever seriously challenged.
MileHigh
Dave45:
Then why don't you open up a thread and explain how it works and show some free energy experiments, explain the freezing water business, the whole nine yards? But my request is absolutely refrain from hints and teases and smoke and mirrors. Just be straight and put forth your proposition.
MileHigh
The coils Iv shown create a spinning aether vortex and yes I have seen this in my ice experiments.......... :-\
never mind its usless :-\
Quote from: Dave45 on September 15, 2013, 09:03:14 PM
The coils Iv shown create a spinning aether vortex and yes I have seen this in my ice experiments.......... :-\
never mind its usless :-\
Hey Dave
Have you done the freeze test on a normal coil in the water?
Mags
I am going to try a simple example to demystify Ampere's Law and then relate it back to the toroid. No math, just a thought experiment instead.
<<< Ampère's circuital law, discovered by André-Marie Ampère in 1826,[1] relates the integrated magnetic field around a closed loop to the electric current passing through the loop. >>>
Let's suppose you are in a room and in the center of the room there is a vertical conductor that goes from the floor to the ceiling with one ampere through it. The current is flowing upwards.
You face the conductor and you know that you are standing in a magnetic field. From the right hand rule you know that the magnetic field is pointing to the right. It has a certain strength, let's call it B1.
You have a task to do. The task is to record the magnetic field strength times the distance you have to walk around the circle of the magnetic field. No need to ask why, you just do the task.
Now, facing the conductor all the time, you move one meter to the right. We will say your distance from the wire is R1. On a pad you record B1 x 1 meter. You keep doing that and adding up the steps. Let's suppose you move 10 meters total to make the full circle. You end up with B1 x 10 meters.
Lets say you move closer to the wire. We will say your distance to the wire is now R2. Now the magnetic field strength has increased to B2. To make the full circle this time you move only 5 meters. So you end up with B2 x 5 meters.
In both cases you have gone full-circle and you have two summations. Think about this: The closer you are, the stronger the magnetic field. And also, the closer you are the smaller distance to make the circle. So it would seem to make sense that B1 x 10 meters should be equivalent to B2 x 5 meters.
What are the units for a magnetic field? From Ampere's law we know that B1 x 10 meters = the current in the wire. Think about the fact that the wire is the actual source of the magnetic field.
We can say that B x meters = Current (From Ampere's Law). That means that B is simply equal to current/meters. And that is indeed the case, you can express the magnetic field in the units of amperes per meter.
When you walk around the circle you you add up magnetic field in amperes per meter times the meters you walk -> that gives you amperes.
Now, suppose that there is a second wire 50 centimeters away from the first wire. It also has one ampere of current flowing through it going upwards. Now the magnetic field will not be the same strength in every place as you walk around the circle. However, when you do your summation you will end up with the B x meters walked giving you a result of two amperes. The B changes as you move but that's doesn't matter. You end up with two amperes in the loop that you formed by walking around the two wires.
Now here is a key point. Let's make the current in the second wire go downwards instead of upwards. Recall that the original wire has current going from bottom to top.
As you walk around the loop and take note of the magnetic field strength it varies. In fact when you are closer to the original wire the magnetic field is going to the right. However, now when you are closer to the new wire with the downward current flow, the magnetic field is going to the left. You should be able to see that part of your loop will have a "positive" field x distance summation and part of the loop will have a "negative" field times distance summation. Therefore when you travel through the complete 360-degree loop, the summation will be "positive field x distance" plus "negative field x distance" for a net result of the distance x field summation being zero amperes. Since one wire has one ampere of current gong from bottom to top and the other wire has one ampere of current going from top to bottom the net current going through the "walk around" loop is zero. So it all works out, net zero amperes current flow equals net zero field times distance.
Very important point: Even though the summation is zero, the magnetic field is not necessarily zero in this two-wire example as you walk around the loop.
Next posting for the big reveal.
MileHigh
@MH
I for one,will be looking forward to that next posting,as the first make's complete sence.
So with that being said,im about to throw a spanner in the work's with something i am building at the moment.I will try and get the video done and up by tonight-here on this thread.It's not so much a device to try and gain energy,but more a tool for learning.
Now suppose that you have a toroid. Let's say that there are 100 turns and there is one ampere flowing through the wire.
As you walk around the in the center horizontal plane of the toroid, you are "seeing" 100 wires with upwards current and 100 wires with downwards current. So you would expect that as you walk around the loop the summation will be zero net current.
Now, in the previous example you got a zero net current summation as you walked around the loop. But depending on where you were there was a measurable magnetic field. Sometimes it pointed left, sometimes it pointed right.
Here is the biggie: The 100 + 100 wires that are emanating a magnetic field are all perfectly symmetrical. The wire spacing is all evenly spread out. You have symmetry.
Because there is symmetry in the physical layout of the wires, you are never closer to an particular "upwards" wire or a particular "downwards" wire.
Therefore you know that the field that you see as you walk around the toroid MUST be the same in all places because of the symmetry.
At the same time you know that the net current seen by the loop is 100 up + 100 down which equals zero net current.
Put those two concepts together: The field must be the same everywhere and the summation of the field x walking through the circle must be zero.
The only magnetic field condition that will satisfy both of those requirements at the same time is for the magnetic field to be ZERO everywhere in the horizontal plane of the toroid.
This same set of conditions will apply if you are outside the toroid or if you are inside the "doughnut hole" of the toroid.
Inside the toroid itself is a different story, and in this thread we already showed what the magnetic field looks like inside the toroid.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on September 17, 2013, 12:56:35 AM
Very important point: Even though the summation is zero, the magnetic field is not necessarily zero in this two-wire example as you walk around the loop.
Yes. When the sum of the fields is zero, both fields are still present. Just because the net field strength at some point is zero, it does not mean that there is no magnetic field at that point. It only means you can not detect the field at that point. The fields do not magically disappear, they are still there. I see many text books saying that the magnetic field "disappears" and that is not true.
Quote from: MileHigh on September 17, 2013, 01:20:34 AM
Because there is symmetry in the physical layout of the wires, you are never closer to an particular "upwards" wire or a particular "downwards" wire.
MileHigh
You lost me there. The distance to any particular wire will change as you move (unless you move in a circle around it).
I think i may have found a time lag in the magnetic field,from the outer part of the core,to the inner part of the core-or something like that???
Ok,we have a toroid core with three windings of equal length and wire size raped around the toroid core.1 is our primary,and the other two are the secondaries.Each secondary has a 100 ohm load resistor across it. Using an ac input to the primary,is it possable to get a phase shift between the two secondaries? from 0* right through to 180* out,simply by raising the frequency?.
Quote from: tinman on September 17, 2013, 01:24:23 PM
I think i may have found a time lag in the magnetic field,from the outer part of the core,to the inner part of the core-or something like that???
Ok,we have a toroid core with three windings of equal length and wire size raped around the toroid core.1 is our primary,and the other two are the secondaries.Each secondary has a 100 ohm load resistor across it. Using an ac input to the primary,is it possable to get a phase shift between the two secondaries? from 0* right through to 180* out,simply by raising the frequency?.
My first guess would be no. Both secondaries are driven by the same flux path circulating in the toroid and therefore will have the same output if they are identical. However, if the primary is next to one of the secondaries, then it is possible that there is capacitive coupling between that secondary and the primary which does not exist for the other secondary. This creates a more complex circuit which may produce a difference in phase shift between the two secondaries. Are you actually seeing this? Does it happen when the primary is not near the secondary coils? Do the secondaries have a different capacitance to ground? As the frequency is increased, even very small (often unnoticed) capacitances will create all sorts of funny problems in ccircuits. That is why professional engineers are very careful to avoid stray capacitance.
Xee2:
QuoteYes. When the sum of the fields is zero, both fields are still present. Just because the net field strength at some point is zero, it does not mean that there is no magnetic field at that point. It only means you can not detect the field at that point. The fields do not magically disappear, they are still there. I see many text books saying that the magnetic field "disappears" and that is not true.
If the net field strength is zero, then there is no magnetic field at that point. Look at the case of the two wires example, one with current flowing downwards and the other with current flowing upwards. There will be zero net field when the magnetic field vector due to each wire is equal in strength and they are 180 degrees apart in direction.
A little complication that may be worth mentioning is that when you walk around the loop and do the summation you are only looking at the part of the magnetic field that's in the same direction that you are moving. Look at the original clip where he says something like "the dot product can be ignored because the direction of integration and the direction of the magnetic field are always in the same direction." He intentionally keeps it simple where the magnetic field is always in the same direction as the movement.
What this means is that in the two-wire example you can have net zero field in the direction of your tangential movement which contributes zero to your summation, but there still could be a "radial" magnetic field. You don't worry about the possible "radial" component of the net magnetic field due to the two wires. You travel in your circle and add up the magnetic field components that are in the same (or 180 degree opposite) direction that you are traveling. I may have made things too complicated, so I don't know if I am helping or hindering.
QuoteYou lost me there. The distance to any particular wire will change as you move (unless you move in a circle around it).
I think I may be able to explain this one without complicating things too much. Let's suppose the toroid has 360 turns. You are standing on your circle outside the toroid and you are going to take your walk around the loop. The circle you are going to walk on is centered on the center of the toroid and the toroid has perfect symmetry.
So you are looking at the toroid. Then you move one degree along your circular path to the right. What do you see? You see the toroid and it looks exactly the same. You move ten degrees along the path and you look at the toroid, it still looks exactly the same. The distance between you and each wire of the toroid that cuts the center plane is always the same when you look at the wires as a whole set. So if the toroid looks exactly the same from any angle, then the magnetic field MUST be the same at any point along the circle. If you do the same thing on a circle with a larger radius, the same type of thing happens.
So you know that the magnetic field must always be the same as you go around the circular path because of symmetry. You also know that the summation of your magnetic field times your movement must be zero amperes. Certainly your movement in meters is not zero, therefore the magnetic field strength must be zero everywhere outside the toroid for everything to make sense and add up properly.
So that also means if just one loop of the toroid is larger than all the others and sticks out, then the symmetry is broken and now there will be an observable magnetic field everywhere outside the toroid. That's why you say that a real-life toroid that you make on your bench will have a "near zero" magnetic field outside the doughnut shape, because it's impossible to build a toroid with perfect symmetry.
MileHigh
Tinman:
QuoteI think i may have found a time lag in the magnetic field,from the outer part of the core,to the inner part of the core-or something like that???
Ok,we have a toroid core with three windings of equal length and wire size raped around the toroid core.1 is our primary,and the other two are the secondaries.Each secondary has a 100 ohm load resistor across it. Using an ac input to the primary,is it possable to get a phase shift between the two secondaries? from 0* right through to 180* out,simply by raising the frequency?.
A component like a transformer will only work properly below a certain frequency. So it's not surprising that you see the phase shift change as you increase the frequency. However, there should be a certain bandwidth where the transformer does its job properly. The phase shift could be due to capacitive and other effects. If you Google something like "AC characteristics of a transformer" or "frequency response of a transformer" you should get tons of hits.
As a side note and not related to this discussion, the classic mechanical equivalent for a transformer is simply a set of two gears. If you look at the rotational speed and torque characteristics of a set of gears they are identical to the voltages and currents associated with an electrical transformer.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on September 17, 2013, 07:00:27 PM
If the net field strength is zero, then there is no magnetic field at that point.
I greatly respect your opinions, but I do disagree with you on this (and I know many agree with your position, so I may be the odd man out).
If you have a space filled with multiple magnetic field generators, as you move about the space there may be places where the magnetic field strength goes to zero. If the magnetic fields actually disappeared, then where did the energy in the magnetic field go? The only reasonable answer, is that the fields and their energy are always there. It is only measured strength that goes to zero. Back when I started in electronic engineering (a long time ago) we used slot lines (which are slots cut in wave guide) with a probe to measure the e-field strength inside the wave guide as a way of determining microwave frequency. If the signal really disappeared when the e-field went to zero there would be no wave coming out the end of the wave guide (but there was). I feel that teaching that the field disappears creates a lot of confusion about what is really happening.
Well at these high frequencies,probably nothing out of the ordinary then, But here is the experiment anyway.
First i cast two half toriod cores ,using liquid steel. Perm not so god,but still quite magnetic. I then wound one of the secondaries around one half of the toroid core. I then glued the two halves together. So now we have the secondaries windings passing through the middle of the core.
Once dry,i then wound the primary and the second secondairy around the whole core-as per normal.All wires were of equal length. It's a bit rough,but was only for a quick experiment.
Sorry the volume is a bit low,but it was filmed at 1am,and everyone was asleep.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C1VC_-f3Z0
Quote from: MileHigh on September 17, 2013, 07:00:27 PM
So that also means if just one loop of the toroid is larger than all the others and sticks out, then the symmetry is broken and now there will be an observable magnetic field everywhere outside the toroid. That's why you say that a real-life toroid that you make on your bench will have a "near zero" magnetic field outside the doughnut shape, because it's impossible to build a toroid with perfect symmetry.
MileHigh
Nice explanation. :)
TinMan,
The coil around half of the core has less wire than the coil around the entire core, thus there is more capacitance between the windings in the coil around the entire core. This capacitance creates a parallel resonant circuit with the coil inductance. As the coil goes through self resonance the voltage across it increases. As the frequency goes beyond resonance the reactance goes from inductive to capacitive which is what produces the phase shift. You should be able to see the self resonance of each coil by increasing the frequency until the voltage peaks. In your video it looks like the blue coil peaks at a lower frequency than the other coil. This gives some more information about self resonance >> http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/self-resonant_frequency_of_inductors.htm
Hi xee2
The three coils are of tha same length of wire.The coil wound around the half core has more turns that the two around the whole core-but the lengths are the same,as i cut all three lengths side by side befor i wound them.
It wasnt to show anything speacial,just sharing an experiment i did to see what would happen.
Quote from: tinman on September 17, 2013, 11:19:10 PM
Hi xee2
The three coils are of tha same length of wire.The coil wound around the half core has more turns that the two around the whole core-but the lengths are the same,as i cut all three lengths side by side befor i wound them.
It wasnt to show anything speacial,just sharing an experiment i did to see what would happen.
Then it may be that the capacitance of both coils is the same. But the inductance of the coils is most likely different. However, if you look at the charts in the link I referenced, you can see how the phase changes as the frequency goes through the self resonance of the coil. I think this is the phase change you are seeing.
Just got finished with my lasersaber motor. Still working on my dual reed switch holder, but have made a single to mess with in the mean time. May get out a vid tomorrow.
Should have my linear hall sensors this week hopefully to do some tests on a wound toroid. I want to test one that is wound all the way around and one that has a primary on one portion and a secondary on the other. I can imagine that if there are fields in the hole of the toroid, if wound all the way around, fields, or say flux will be coming from all the turns at the same time from all angles. So it may read neutral in the center, but more the closer to the inner windings. But, if I wind primary to the left and sec to the right, and still get a neutral enter, I should get a difference from left to right and up and down from center. At least these are my ideas on testing this and anticipated outcomes, possibly.
But one of the reasons Im even writing this is some thoughts I had on other test. Lets say we have 2 toroid cores and wind them the same. Then use a ferrite rod through the toroids centers like an axle with wheels. I wonder if input to one would induce the other? Just thinking. If we can run 1 wire through the toroid, equal to 1/4 turn, really, and get output from that wire, then why not see if we can draw out any flexing fields from one core to another via an axle core. Also, how would a core in the hole of a toroid affect the toroid coil function, or value. All things to try.
Tinman. Nice idea on the home made split core with windings inside the core. ;) I have thought of that before but never tried. I have seen parametric transformers that seem similarly buried in the core in relation the other winding.
So the buried coil has less output compared to the outer secondary. ??? ;D Well, only half the length of its inner windings, being they turn into the core half way, are available for induction in the hole as compared to the other secondaries inner portions of its winding as they go all the way around. Even though there are more turns on that other secondary, Im sure it is not double the outer turns, and the difference in output is not half either. So it may be that you are showing some possible proof of what I was saying about all the action is in the open area of a toroid. :o ;D Maybe not. But it sure does fit the ideas possibilities.
Now, what would really kick off some brain cells is to cut the kids toy 90deg from where you cut the first mold for your core so that you have an outer diameter part and an inner diameter part. lol, just thinking of this as I write and I need to get to bed, but...
Now, when you cast your parts, if there is a way to create a gap, so the parts could fit with windings through the gap, then, wind a coil on the outer diameter part, then wind the inner diameter part then apply more JB weld or what ever mix your using to glue it together, Then wind a primary over that.
What will be interesting is which secondary, the inner or the outer will have what output. It would be funny if the inner had more, especially considerably more. ;)
Nite
Mags
Hey Tin
Below is an illustration of how I think it should be wound as to isolate the windings from each other to eliminate winding to winding proximity and to let the core do its thing. If we wind primary directly over the secondaries, the secondaries will surely get induced by the primary directly as the flux from the primary is attracted to the core, cutting the secondaries along the way. This might not show us exactly what we are looking for, which is how the primary flux engages the secondary using the core as the path from the primary to secondary. Also having 2 secondaries wound on top of one another may affect the outcome because they share the area in between the cores. So isolating them from each other should give more definitive results as to what is going on with the core being the only connection(magnetically) between windings. Then fill in the gaps in the 2 cores with your liquid core material. Hope that makes sense. ;D
Also, no need for many windings. I would do 10 turns for each and just 1 tight layer each. Just use a current limiting resistor, non inductive, in series with the primary to accommodate signal gen capabilities. Results should be as good as many turns without all the work. My soundstream amp uses 3 turns of 6 parallel wires for a primary and it works great. And thats at 60khz. But play with the freq all you want. :D
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on September 18, 2013, 02:35:22 AMLets say we have 2 toroid cores and wind them the same. Then use a ferrite rod through the toroids centers like an axle with wheels. I wonder if input to one would induce the other? Just thinking. If we can run 1 wire through the toroid, equal to 1/4 turn, really, and get output from that wire, then why not see if we can draw out any flexing fields from one core to another via an axle core. Also, how would a core in the hole of a toroid affect the toroid coil function, or value. All things to try.
Mags
Xee2:
QuoteIf you have a space filled with multiple magnetic field generators, as you move about the space there may be places where the magnetic field strength goes to zero. If the magnetic fields actually disappeared, then where did the energy in the magnetic field go? The only reasonable answer, is that the fields and their energy are always there. It is only measured strength that goes to zero. Back when I started in electronic engineering (a long time ago) we used slot lines (which are slots cut in wave guide) with a probe to measure the e-field strength inside the wave guide as a way of determining microwave frequency. If the signal really disappeared when the e-field went to zero there would be no wave coming out the end of the wave guide (but there was). I feel that teaching that the field disappears creates a lot of confusion about what is really happening.
You are missing an important distinction. We were talking about an example were there were interacting fields from two wires with DC current going through them. In that case there will be places in the 3D field where there is no magnetic field and by definition there is no electric field.
Here is a thought experiment: You have a 10-meter length of straight wire. So that's an inductor. You put 10 volts across the ends of the wire and let's say 10 amps of current flow. It takes a short while to overcome the inductance and build up the magnetic field that surrounds the wire. So we know that there is a certain amount of energy stored in the magnetic field around the wire.
Now, lets take the same same wire and make a 180-degree bend at the 5-meter point so that the wire is folded over and the two ends of the wire are right next to each other. You put 10 volts across the terminals and 10 amps of current flow. However, there is a huge difference here. The parallel halves of the wire create magnetic fields that mostly cancel each other out. Therefore the inductance for this wire configuration is much much smaller than for the straight wire. Therefore the current rises to 10 amps much much faster, and there is much much less energy stored in the magnetic field around the wire. So there is no "energy that was always there" in this configuration. There is simply less energy from the get-go. Everything balances out like it is supposed to.
In your case, you are making reference to standing waves in a microwave waveguide cavity. I vaguely remember doing the experiment where you stick a sensor needle into the slit in the waveguide to sense for the intensity of the electric field. I am not qualified to state exactly what is going on there but I can say that this is an AC resonator-type configuration and not a DC configuration. So it's a whole different ball of wax and when you aren't sensing the electric field there may be a complimentary magnetic field at play. I get a headache just thinking about it.
Let's look at a more manageable AC standing wave setup. You set up standing waves with a skipping rope. So is there no energy at the nodes where rope is not moving? The answer is no, when the skipping rope standing wave reaches the peak of the oscillation and stops for a brief second, all of the energy is stored in the stretched rope. So the non-moving node is actually the center of a stretched linear spring in this example. You have a rough analogy were the AC rope velocity and the AC rope stretched spring tension are equivalent to the AC electric field and the AC magnetic field.
It's a good segway into thinking about an analogy for an energized inductor. I think many people on the forums might just think that "it happens." Think of holding a big beryllium copper torsion bar in between your two hands. You twist it and takes a lot of work to bend it. You can only hold it in the bent position for 10 seconds max. So you release the pressure and it kicks back. There is your "collapsing magnetic field." If you are straining to hold it in the twisted position, it may feel like your body is doing work on the bar, but of course that's not the case. You hold it for as long as you can and then the work you put in will be kicked back at you. People on the forums often fail to visualize the work aspect to energize a coil and the fact that the magnetic field is kind of "stressing" the space in the immediate area and the space wants to stress right back and get back to normal. You are "bending the space" and it doesn't like it and wants to get back to the unbent position. Instead, they daydream about the clockwork of the Universe, or they search for "magical" coil configurations, bla bla bla. It's much more basic than that.
MileHigh
QuoteYou are missing an important distinction. We were talking about an example were there were interacting fields from two wires with DC current going through them. In that case there will be places in the 3D field where there is no magnetic field and by definition there is no electric field.
Not true, you dont know what you are talking about, period.
I could prove you wrong but will not waste my time.
Dave45:
QuoteNot true, you dont know what you are talking about, period.
I could prove you wrong but will not waste my time.
I do know what I am talking about. There is an electric field but in the context of this example there is no electric field that merits being part of the discussion. Also, the dismissive "waste my time" shtick is getting tiring and it's rude. Likewise, saying "you don't know what you are talking about" is just a cop out on your part. I have been around this forum long enough so that many people will state that I do know what I am talking about and I try to make a point of only discussing what I know about. By the same token I am human and not perfect.
So, like I said before, make your case and be straight with no hints, no teases, no smoke and mirrors. Please stop making these "spooky" postings. Just be real. Can you do that?
For reference, here is the example from the earlier posting: We were talking about an example were there were interacting fields from two wires with DC current going through them. In that case there will be places in the 3D field where there is no magnetic field and by definition
there is no electric field.
Where is the electric field in this example Dave? Please state your proof that I am wrong.
Your right it was rude and I apologize
Here's some more pseudoscience for ya
this is a coil powered with 12v dc
Dave45:
You keep changing the subject mid stream. Hence another "spooky" posting.
Here is the subject at hand:
Where is the electric field in this example Dave? Please state your proof that I am wrong.
Here's one powered with 12v ac
This coil the first one I showed in this thread is wound and powered with dc so the current runs against each winding and results in no detectable magnetic field using a compass but still has an electric field.
Well if you can change the subject then I can change the subject. You will get a "charge" out of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe5FgFOkxkI
Are we having a productive "debate" now?
Dave45:
Focus..... Focus....
Quoting you:
QuoteNot true. I could prove you wrong.
For reference, here is the example from the earlier posting: We were talking about an example were there were interacting fields from two wires with DC current going through them. In that case there will be places in the 3D field where there is no magnetic field and by definition
there is no electric field.
Where is the electric field in this example Dave? Please state your proof that I am wrong.
your post had nothing to do with magnetic and electric fields, mine well I know pseudoscience, like I said wasting my time.
later
dave
A legitimate second subject:
QuoteThis coil the first one I showed in this thread is wound and powered with dc so the current runs against each winding and results in no detectable magnetic field using a compass but still has an electric field.
I don't know what you mean when you say, "the current runs against each winding." Can you elaborate?
How much current was running through the coil when you tried to measure the magnetic field with a compass? How did you actually physically do the compass measurement? How can you be sure the compass was sensitive enough?
How do you know there was an electric field? How did you measure it?
Quote from: MileHigh on September 19, 2013, 12:42:30 AM
Dave45:
Focus..... Focus....
Quoting you:
For reference, here is the example from the earlier posting: We were talking about an example were there were interacting fields from two wires with DC current going through them. In that case there will be places in the 3D field where there is no magnetic field and by definition there is no electric field.
Where is the electric field in this example Dave? Please state your proof that I am wrong.
Its like me saying there's a nose on your face and your saying there isnt, and the whole time your looking right at it.
past my bedtime
later
Dave45:
Quoteyour post had nothing to do with magnetic and electric fields, mine well I know pseudoscience, like I said wasting my time.
later
dave
I would call that a "spooky fail" on your part. You challenge me on my example, and when I reply to engage with you, you post more pictures of coils frozen in glass containers. What the heck?
And then you get rude again. The truth is I tried to legitimately hear you out with respect to your comments about my example and discuss it with you and you ended up wasting my time. You did not discuss my example at all, the one you challenged me about. How ironic.
MileHigh
P.S.:
QuoteIts like me saying there's a nose on your face and your saying there isnt, and the whole time your looking right at it.
I would call that an attempt at misdirection. Thanks for the non-debate. I was truly willing to debate your contention that there is an electric field in my example with the two wires with DC current flowing through them. As much as I tried to debate that specific example with you, you simply thew things at me that had nothing at all to do with the example. Hence I gave you the example of an ice hotel. The art of "non-linear debate."
It makes me think of those silly little things that people put in their high school year book write-ups for their personal profiles. This one guy put this in for his write-up and for some reason I could never forget it:
Roses are red
Violets are blue
I like Corn Flakes
Can you swim?
Should we just dismiss the ice formations in Daves Ice projects? If we had 2 containers with the same coils filled with water, and we power one coil and not power the other, and if in the end, the powered coil in ice has spiral formations and the unpowered coil doe not, is it still insignificant? Are we not curious as to what is causing these distortions in the ice due to an energized coil? If not, then why not? ;)
Mags
Quote from: MileHigh on September 18, 2013, 10:25:37 PM
Here is a thought experiment: You have a 10-meter length of straight wire. So that's an inductor. You put 10 volts across the ends of the wire and let's say 10 amps of current flow. It takes a short while to overcome the inductance and build up the magnetic field that surrounds the wire. So we know that there is a certain amount of energy stored in the magnetic field around the wire.
Now, lets take the same same wire and make a 180-degree bend at the 5-meter point so that the wire is folded over and the two ends of the wire are right next to each other. You put 10 volts across the terminals and 10 amps of current flow. However, there is a huge difference here. The parallel halves of the wire create magnetic fields that mostly cancel each other out. Therefore the inductance for this wire configuration is much much smaller than for the straight wire. Therefore the current rises to 10 amps much much faster, and there is much much less energy stored in the magnetic field around the wire. So there is no "energy that was always there" in this configuration. There is simply less energy from the get-go. Everything balances out like it is supposed to.
MileHigh,
Agreed. I guess we were not talking about the same thing. Thanks for your interesting discussions.
Perhaps just a few closing thoughts on on some of the topics.
The analysis of the toroid using Ampere's Law was based on an "air" toroid. Of course that's the hardest one to set up to not emanate any magnetic field and you need "perfect" symmetry in your coil windings. Once you add a high-permeability core to the inside of the toroid then things get a lot easier. The core is going to channel the magnetic flux and offer a much "easier" path than the free space outside the core. So a decently wound toroidal coil around a toroidal core will produce a near near zero field outside the toroid. Even just doing a partial wind (totally broken symmetry) and leaving a lot of the core bare will still barely emanate a magnetic field to the outside free space. The point is to understand the harder problem first, and appreciate the fact that even without a core the toroid will not emanate much of a magnetic field. And for the sake of completeness note that the analysis that was done for the air core toroidal coil was only done in the horizontal plane of the toroid that cuts it in two like a bagel. The analysis doesn't say anything about what the magnetic field looks like outside of the center plane of the air toroid.
Also, note that I mentioned the "secondary" magnetic field. So you draw a different Amperian loop. This one is at a right angle to the plane of the toroid and it cuts right through the center of the doughnut and encircles the tube of the toroid. That Amperian loop sees current so you know that there is a secondary magnetic field through the doughnut hole of the toroid.
I may have been able to decipher Dave45's thinking. Dave45 please comment to correct me if I am wrong. I will take a chance and state this. He may have seen the thought experiment with the wires with DC current and just instantly related it to his experiments with coils in ice. So perhaps he just superimposed what he thinks his coil and ice experiments were telling him and "forced" the same conclusions on my thought experiment? That's kind of like a bull in a China shop. The two things are not related at all. Here is another hypothetical. Dave45 stated that there is no magnetic field around one of his setups. Let's take the example of the photograph of the vertical glass cylinder with the vertical coil embedded in ice. If you run DC current through the coil and move a horizontal hand-held compass around the vertical glass cylinder there is a good chance that you could get thrown off and not detect the magnetic field generated by the coil! You would have to lay the glass ice cylinder out horizontally to measure the magnetic field. You also have to be sure you are running enough current through the coil so that the magnetic field generated by the coil generates a magnetic bubble in the Earth's magnetic field. Dave45 offers up next to zero information so I am just speculating.
MileHigh
Well,looking at the video you posted MH,it's good to see the eskimo's have gone up in the world with there igloo's.
Anyway,im quite supprised Dave45 could get the water to freeze,having a heater in the middle of it. Must have been very low P/in,so as the coil didnt get hot-or even warm.
Now how exactly dose the coriolis effect work in a bathtub(when you pull the plug)-when the object is fixed and traveling with the rotating mass?.
Just to clarify I checked the coil for a magnetic field before I put it in water, horizontal, no magnetic field.
The coil was powered with 12v dc using an automotive bulb pulling 2 amps.
Iv froze alot of coils using different types of water, bottled drinking water works best for clarity.
Something I found strange if the bulb is placed after the coil, on the pos side it will kill the power supply, its like the coil draws on the supply, the bulb acts as a limiter (resistor) keeping the coil from pulling on the supply, very strange. I killed three or four power supply's before I found this out.
If the coil is placed horizontal in the ice it distorts the fields, the earth has an effect on a coil, all coils in your experiments should be in a vertical position so the fields are not distorted, if you remember the TPU would not work if positioned wrong this is because of the distorted fields, that and the TPU draws energy in one end and passes it out the other.
Alot can be learned by placing coils in water and freezing them, it takes about 24 hours for one to freeze solid but it you check the cell about every hour you may see some interesting results.
The coil winding I showed, not this specific one, but one like it.
The core was rusted and the rust spread and settled in the bottom of the container, the coil spun the water and cleared the rust in the bottom this was at about five or six inches from the coil, do you realize how much force it took to spin the cold water, this was a strong spinning field.
This post was posted in haste Im kindof in a hurry
later
dave
Hey Dave
So you use the light bulb in series with the coil to limit the current?
Here is what I think some are thinking, and I question it a bit also. Its natural to question. ;)
The coil is producing a certain amount of heat. This will cause currents in the water, up and down, all while the freeze tries to solidify. Its a logical thought considering.
At my work, when the painter has cleaned out his gun into a container, and the paint was a pearl, it ends up a liquid of lacquer thinner tainted with paint color and pearl. If I take that container and set it in the palm of my hand, the top surface of the liquid seams to come alive. Swirling fractal waves coming up from the center spreading outward across the top surface. Put your hand on the side of the container and the swirls come up from that side. So its not hard for me to believe that heat may have something to do with it. Possibly ;)
Are these vector fields able to go through glass? If so, here is what I suggest. Fill your container to the top and set up the coil on a horizontal axis facing the jar. The distance should be close to the jar optimally, but heat radiates. Maybe freeze the coil in a block first, then place the block right next to the jar. If you still get swirls in the jar, then I would have much more confidence in saying that it is not heat causing it. Or make a framework that the coil is mounted in the middle and shelves you can put one jar below the coil, one above and one left and right. If there are mostly only swirls in the top jar, then heat is rising and causing it I would say.
Just thoughts on how you could get people to understand that fields are really doing it instead of the first possible thought by others of the effect being caused by heat. ;D
Mags
I really dont think its heat causing the effect but even if it is the ice freezes solid and it looked exactly like a tornado in the container.
I used a plastic container, the ones they use to cook pasta by adding boiling water. Something of interest, if the coil is energized it will not crack the container but if the coil is not energized more than likely the ice will bust the container.
Another experiment I did, I know some dont believe in the ether but check this out.
I took a transformer put it in the container covered the container in copper screen wire basically creating a Faraday cage,(I lined the inside of the container) then I froze the container without the transformer being energized, it busted the container and ripped a two inch slit in the screen, I got kindof discouraged because it ripped the screen but I decided to energize the trany anyway. I left the cell in the freezer and energized the coil and checked it about an hour later, there was a jagged line from the slit in the screen leading to the tranny that looked like a lightning strike, the jagged line had not made it all the way to the trany this tells me the line was coming from outside the cell and not from the transformer. At the time I really didnt realize what was happening I thawed the container and took everything apart without taking any pics but as I thought about it later I wished I had taken pics. Does this prove the existance of the ether :-\ not sure, I was planning on repeating the experiment but havent done it yet.
Here's a pic of one of the setups I used before being froze.
I have froze a permanent magnet and the field is there just like with the coils, there is a field besides the magnetic field, there are two fields the magnetic field and the electric field. If you think about it the electric field runs 90 degrees to the magnetic field and this is exactly where this field is, right where its supposed to be.
Guys Im no electronics expert and not the sharpest tak in the shed but it doesnt take a genius to realize this needs to be explored in more detail.
Here's a permanent magnet froze in ice, this is with tap water so its not as clear as with the bottled water. Notice the field is not at 90 degrees in relation to the magnet but more like 60 or 51 to be more precise.
Check this out, the camera pic shows a curvature in the ice in some of the pics I took but there was no curve there when taking the pic..
Another, can someone explain this.
These pics were all taken withing a three minute window of the cell with a permanent magnet inside.
An to the next question yes I froze two magnets in repulsion, notice there are two separate fields, not a very good pic, I used tap water this is before I found bottled water worked best for clarity.
I finally got the parts in to build an adjustable test platform
I suck at electronics so it probably wont get tested as it should but I will give a go
Dave45:
QuoteJust to clarify I checked the coil for a magnetic field before I put it in water, horizontal, no magnetic field.
The coil was powered with 12v dc using an automotive bulb pulling 2 amps.
The coil had to have an observable magnetic field. So there is something wrong there. Perhaps you could post a pic of the coil so we could try to understand why you did not observe a magnetic field.
MileHigh
Hey MileHigh
The coil was wound and connected specifically so it would not have a magnetic field, so as to cancel its own field.
Rather than try to explain I will draw it out later this evening, Im busy at the moment, honey do this honey do that, no rest for the weary.
dave
QuoteLets say we have 2 toroid cores and wind them the same. Then use a ferrite rod through the toroids centers like an axle with wheels. I wonder if input to one would induce the other? Just thinking. If we can run 1 wire through the toroid, equal to 1/4 turn, really, and get output from that wire, then why not see if we can draw out any flexing fields from one core to another via an axle core. Also, how would a core in the hole of a toroid affect the toroid coil function, or value. All things to try.
Your wheels need spokes and spin 8)
Good morinin America how are ya, dont ya know me Im your native son ;D
Hi all,
This video is very enlightening:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haez8oojjDo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haez8oojjDo)
Regards
Here is one I like. It has an odd twist to the winding of the secondary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaYOph1I3uw
Mags
Still havnt gotten my hall sensors. ??? New tracking date is the 3rd. But thats not news. ;)
But this is. Below is some pics of parts on a circuit board from a high end electric wheel chair motor control box. My buddy works on these things and gave me some out dated stuff. Anyway, there are 4 of these small cores with the thick wires as you see. But, the lil white stripe is a marking on the top of a hall sensor. ;D They look to be measuring currents on the outputs to the motors. Never seen that before. So Im going to remove the sensors this weekend and try some things. One pic is of the bottom of the board where you can see the thick wires soldered and the 3 little soldered leads(hall). Pretty cool idea.
Just thought that might be interesting. ;)
Mags
Hi Mags,
Yes, this solution is indeed interesting, not seen yet such either. If I can see it correctly the sensor is placed into the air gap of a toroidal core and any current change in the heavy wire that the motor initiates would appear as a flux change in the gap of the core.
It is a kind of a current transformer without output coil.
If the exact type of the Hall sensor cannot be identified then you need to assume two things: whether it gives a linear output which is proportional to the flux change (i.e. current change) or it gives a digital low or high above a certain flux strength for initiating certain switching interaction (say due to overcurrent).
Gyula
http://www.nktechnologies.com/current-sensing.html
http://www.sensorsmag.com/sensors/electric-magnetic/measuring-current-with-imc-hall-effect-technology-786
http://www.scienceshareware.com/how-to-measure-AC-DC-current-with-a-hall-effect-clamp-.htm
Mags ;D
So that must be how a clamp amp meter measures DC current. ;)
Mags
Here is a pic of a cool field viewer. This could be done with a toroid. Piece of plexi with a hole for the outer diameter of the toroid and a small circle piece for the toroid hole. It would be interesting to see if iron filings do anything around the toroid.
Mags
I think the magnetic field would be stronger on top of the plexiglass than on the bottom.but that is just a guess. :)
Quote from: Magluvin on September 27, 2013, 11:02:08 PM
So that must be how a clamp amp meter measures DC current. ;)
Mags
And AC current. ;) 60Hz is no problem for many Hall sensors.
Been playing with my setup, Im not getting a very good coupling between the toroids and the pickup coil, :-\ perseverance
I may hit it with some high voltage just to see if I can get liftoff ;D
Quote from: poynt99 on September 29, 2013, 07:43:11 AM
And AC current. ;) 60Hz is no problem for many Hall sensors.
Absolutely ac and dc. I just never knew it was a hall sensor. I figured wire wound pickup can read ac, but how dc? ;) I suppose it could be possible that a pickup coil used in a clamp could measure dc current if the pickup coil had an imposed ac signal(small as not to affect the circuit being measured) and the meter circuit monitor the differences between the pos and neg portions of the signal. DC produced field in the clamp core would polarize the meters ac signal as it tries to induce the clamp core. But the hall is much easier. ;D
Mags
Opened another older controller box and it had 2 of the same current sensors. Both boards have a very strong conformal coating, so removing parts is a bit of a chore. Dont want to break the tiny leads of the hall sensors. Only removed 1 from each board, and only one of which I could read the pt no. 3503u. Data sheet below.
Says tested from 0-23khz, then typ is listed as 23khz. So Ill check that to see if thats the limit.
If we want to read field in the hole of a core, and had bridges as shown below in the core, then I put the hall sensor in the gap, up and down reading, would there be any field measured by the hall? ;) And what if the gap is shorter? What if the gap was longer? I believe we are going to find that flux propagates across the hole of the toroid core and is not 'just' locked in the core.
Now if this is where all or most of the mutual inductance between windings, in the hole, then what of the parts of the winding on the sides and outer diameter of the core? And would those parts of the winding be more included if the toroid were encased in a shell core? These are some questions I have with all this.
Mags
I wasnt getting a good coupling between my toroid coils and the pickup coil, because the pickup was not part of the magnetic path :)
Been thinking about the tpu
I think he figured out a way to stop bemf, turned it into femf
So I hooked the Rodin type toroids to the zvs circuit, I am able to dimly light a 12 volt auto bulb from the pickup coil :o
For your consideration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mpE02hwN4s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mpE02hwN4s)
Regards
I picked up this pdf "reinventing the wheel" thread, and starting at page 4, its content follows the "classic flux anomaly" pdf I posted earlier here. ;)
Mags
Hi all,
Another interesting video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz_xS3lHZsk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz_xS3lHZsk)
Regards