Back EMF vs Collapsed Spikes.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_rvJQb2SDY
Watch the above and learn the KEY difference...
More info at a later time......
Yes. This is completely correct. However, rather than argue the point most will use the terms being used.
I know the difference between CEMF and Flyback. The big difference is you need to avoid or prevent BEMF/CEMF and try to make use of Flyback. (If using SS then most will simply short it out rather than use it and they usually don't consider real CEMF except as reluctance.)
BEMF is reactive force fighting the work force. Flyback is wasted energy (for narrow minded folks).
Newton's third law: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." OR properly translated: "For every force, there is an equal and opposite force." (I understand he did not write his papers in a modern speak)
To fight BEMF your coil must be an open circuit.
To make use of Flyback you can add a second 'open' coil within your first coil with a single end connected to the first. The key is to counterwind that second internal coil. The term used was 'induced stepping'.
You've heard of capacitive Jacob's ladders? Now you know how to make an inductive form.
@Tao
Thanks for this topic and the video link, looking forward to read more on this very interesting and important topic.
@Bep
May I refer to your circuit uploaded here because it perfectly fits to this topic: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2831.msg41943.html#msg41943
which if I understand well make use of the energy of the collapsed spike when the cathode follower switches off. It means then you can roughly half the switch-on time for the cathode follower because the "other half" of energy can come from the capacitor which stores the energy of the spike at collapse, right? Please comment if I am wrong.
I would be interested in a schematics also on your thoughts in your last post, though I guess now it is mainly included in the one at the above link? ;)
Thanks,
Gyula
Are you guys absolutely sure about this. I always thought BEMF was the current inrush that happens when you collapse a field. Why was this not put forth a year ago?
Many members on the board (including me) have been taking about BEMF and most have got it wrong. Ouch and a half. @Hum - no comment please.
Tao, this one bit of info has opened my eyes. Thanks. Finally someone who can vulgarize the subject.
So in layman terms BEMF is the circuits natural ability to counter current flow when the circuit is running or on. Sort of like a natural rheostat.
So when you open one end of the circuit, the polarity reverses and current goes back to the source.
So what happens if you open the other end instead. Does it still go back to the other source?
If yes, does this mean both + and - could act as source? This question has been bugging me for a long time now.
So what happens if you open both ends of the circuit at the same time?
Maybe opening both ends at the same time will create what Tesla did with sending spikes or sparks perpendicular to the coil.
@BEP
That circuit referred to by gyulasun reminds me of your reverse wound Cook Coil. Is that a diode on the circuit? Or a zener diode?
By the way, I'll be winding my primary this weekend on my CBC Build 2, but now I think I will do it in a way to be able to slide it off and reverse the direction to do trials in both directions.
Quote from: wattsup link=topic=3247.msg48307#msg48307
That circuit referred to by gyulasun reminds me of your reverse wound Cook Coil. Is that a diode on the circuit? Or a zener diode?
Hi, if I may chime in... it is a drawing symbol for a Schottky diode. Schottky diodes are inherently capable of switching at a very high speed which is needed here because when you switch off current in the coil the collapsing field induces the spike "at once" and you do not want to miss any small part of it by using a low speed diode like 1N4007 for instance.
Gyula
@gyulason
A Schottky yes but even a Schottky isn't fast enough to recover all.
As far as what that circuit will do as a load of a cathode (emitter) follower - for every pulse you fire two will appear. The second will be incredibly short but possibly much higher amplitude. More pulses follow but they dampen quickly. I have seen flyback as much as 20 times the amplitude of the intended pulse. I've drawn a 1/2 inch arc from a 24VDC coil that had a bad snubber (It was a huge solenoid).
Lets say you have solved the CEMF problem and you are looking for flyback. Hit a coil with 1 watt of energy and open the switch (a very fast one) The field collapse potentially (pun intended) can produce almost 1 watt. If your first watt has already done its work then you have a free one comming back. I wish it was that simple!
BTW - there is a lot to consider on emitter followers. SS doesn't like that. You could wind up with oscillation and a popped tranny.
@Wattsup
Make sure you are looking at the video and not the coil diagram from me when trying to understand this. Using correct terms - my circuit would not avoid CEMF unless it was open( no current flow when turned on ). Think of trying to compress a spring. Your push is the applied current. The spring pushing back is CEMF (not exactly but that is the idea - Newtonian magnetics).
The Cook style coils aren't interesting unless you have a sine signal source nearby overriding the -now- common 50/60 Hz noise. Mine always grew quiet if my fan was on. None of it made sense until I powered it with a battery or hit it with white noise.
Flipping your coil around will be the same handedness. Think about it for a moment.
so what I am understanding is that less resistance = more back EMF. BEMF being a counter force to the current flowing in said coil or wire. More resistance leads to a lower voltage collapse of the magnetic field stored in said coil or wire.
Jason
For the sake of clarity I'll correct your terminology (for any wanting to know - nothing against your wording).
Since we are talking about a coil of wire handling pulses or alternating current, -resistance is futile! - I just wanted to type that one ;D
The correct term is inductive reactance - not resistance.
Take a look at http://www.tpub.com/neets/book2/4a.htm
Please note the value 2pi used in the formula. Unknown to many that is only valid when dealing with alternating current. That variable should be varied when dealing with pulses and must also consider duty cycle.
So, no. Less inductive reactance = less CEMF and also = less flyback voltage.
Flyback is the term I'm used to when talking about the reverse voltage generated by the collapsing field. I didn't run into the term BEMF until I dove into public free energy waters a few months ago. At best it is probably a 'mis-terminology' . I haven't researched this...
More inductive reactance could lead to less ?EMF if the reluctance is so high it prevents the field from building so it would have less to flyback -or collapse.
Bep, many thanks for your further comments.
In the video, I think there is an undefined situation (time 00:31- 00:48) when it shows you disconnect power, the field collapses and the (magnetic) poles reverse: for the poles to reverse should the created spike (the flyback pulse) see a closed circuit or not? Do the magnetic poles change just because current is switched off in a coil? Somehow this info if correct is new to me :o
There is another interesting practical circuit wrt bifilar coils to create high voltage with it as it were a high turn ratio transformer but in fact with low reciprocal property, unknown in usual step-up transformers, see Naudin schematics on it here:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tep4xfrm.htm
and the explanations here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tep4xfrm.htm
and the low reciprocal effect here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tep4nrcp.htm
I mention these because the circuit almost the same you kindly showed and also nicely fits to this topic as a practical example of utilizing collapsing field in bifilar coils. (Naudin's Time Energy Pump concept is not important from our point of view now.)
I would have another question. What could happen with both the CEMF and the flyback pulse if I place a capacitor in parallel with the coil I excite with a pulse? Say I deliberately create a resonant parallel circuit from an electromagnet's coil and choose the pulse frequency accordingly: have you pondered on this situation? One thing is sure: the incoming current would not see an inductive reactance hence the CEMF (Lenz) should be at a minimum and what about the flyback pulse's energy? Will it swing inside the parallel circuit till losses consume it fully unless I do something to regain it?
Regards
Gyula
The poles reverse because the field is moving in the opposite direction ââ,¬â€œ collapsing instead of expanding.
Flyback is generated regardless of load or no load. If it is going into a high impedance load the voltage will remain high.
The referenced circuit is basically the same idea as mine except he will have some voltage increase. I wasnââ,¬â,,¢t looking for increase ââ,¬â€œ just some energy returned to the capacitor.
Adding a capacitor to an inductor only changes the times for field change. Actually you would have a tuned circuit or ââ,¬Ëœtank circuitââ,¬â,,¢. Nothing unusual about that.
Be aware of the action of current (Amps) when voltage is applied to an inductor or capacitor. Current leads voltage when power is applied to a capacitor by 90 degrees. Current lags voltage when power is applied to an inductor by 90 degrees.
What happens to CEMF and flyback? CEMF is still there albeit slightly affected by the capacitorââ,¬â,,¢s charge time. Flyback is still there upon power removal but the capacitor holds a charge an lessens the effect greatly. When power is removed there will be some oscillation for a very short period as the energy equalizes across the tank circuit.
I watched the video and it's very weak and incorrect in some respects, although it brings out a good point and that is to use proper language so we know what is being discussed.
Here's a few things that jumped out.
1) picture showing the coil after current is interupted is labled wrong. It showes the South pole at the top (where the North pole use to be) and it should be the North pole. The poles depend on the direction of the current at that instant. not on any changes (the voltage polarity is what changes, based on whether the field is increasing or decreasing)
2) He says to askyourself a few questions. His assumption is that no current flows when the coil is opened. Well, I got news for you, there is current flow because there is capacitance (interwinding, switch capacitance, etc.) When you flip a switch what you actualy do is switch in a capacitor, albeit, a very small capacitor if you have a good switch. So what you get is actually a tank circuit that resonates realy fast if no breakdown occurs, but usualy air breakdown occurs (or coil breakdown) and the energy flows into heat, light, and rf.
Here's two points that should be kept in mind.
1a) If an external magnetic field "B_ext" INCREASES in a coil, a voltage appears across the terminals of the coil such that if current is allowed to flow (by shorting the leads etc..) it would generate a magnetic field "B_gen" in the coil that OPPOSES the original one. In other words, if B_ext points UP, B_gen points DOWN. HOWEVER THE TOTAL FIELD STILL POINTS IN THE DIRECTION OF B_ext since its the largest field.
1b) If an external magnetic field already present begins to decrease, the coil responds with a polarity such that if current is allowed to flow it would OPPOSE THE CHANGE, but in this case, the generated magnetic field would point IN THE SAME DIRECTION. HOWEVER THE TOTAL FIELD STILL POINTS IN THE DIRECTION OF B_ext since its the largest field.
Is that awesome or what?
A simpler way is to think that the coil responds to prevent changes in the field, period. (Lenz's Law) So to prevent an increasing field you create a field of opposite polarity, and to prevent a field from decreasing you aid it with one of the same polarity.
Now, did you know that in a transformer core that's transfering power, the magnetic flux is almost zero? Can you think why that could be based on the above?
Now, what if there is no EXTERNAL MAGNETIC FIELD, that's doing the changes?
Well, this is the neat part, it doesn't matter who/what creates the magnetic field !!!! It could be the coil itself !!! In actuality the coil responds to the TOTAL MAGNETIC FIELD, that is, the sum of all magnetic fields in the universe that have some flux that passes through the coils area.
So if we say there are no external magnetic fields, how can a coil itself create a magnetic field, and at the same time OPPOSE it? How can it grow?
Well, it works, you see, when you apply a voltage to the terminals of the coil, the current doesn't increase instantly to I x R = V, where R is the resistance of the coil. The reason is because of the back EMF that develops (or this reaction of a coil to changing magnetic fields, also called CEMF or Counter EMF) The reason it's called "BACK" and not "FORWARD" is because it OPPOSES the voltage applied, or comes "BACK" at it, but counter is more intuitive, however BackEMF seems to be used more widely.
So anyway, apply 10 Volts to a coil, and instantly 10 volts of Back EMF showup to oppose, and zero volts IR show up as well (no current flow yet.)
But the 10 volts BEMF, can't be kept up. They are generated as a response to a CHANGEING magnetic field, but how can you have an increasing magnetic field if you don't let the current flow? And current can flow only if there is a difference in voltage potential , so 10 volts -10 volts is zero at the instant of application.
Well there is a compromise, a middle ground where everybody is happy. :)
You see current begins to flow at a SET RATE of di/dt = V/L, so the rate of change of the current (di/dt) is equal to the voltage divided by a constant called the inductance of the coil. So basicaly, the current needs to increase so there can be an increasing magnetic field that will induce the backEMF or else the current will increase instantly and produce a large magnetic change which will create a larger voltage then 10 volts which will try to drive current the other way, so a middle ground exists, a fine ballance of electromotive forces and all this can be dervied with mathematics, but I won't bore you with it.
So in an ideal coil (superconductor perhaps) the current increases LINEARLY from zero, and it's slope is V/L. The magnetic field this current produces is obviously related to the current and it too will increase linearly (that's why it generates the voltage at the terminals after all, which prevents instant current jumps, or discontinuities)
However, in a coil that is resistive, as the current increases more and more of the opposing EMF changes from the Back EMF to the IR voltage drop. This is not an EMF which means Electro-Motive-Force, because its a passive "force" more like a resistance. LOL. Anyway, it begins to produce a resistive voltage drop across the coil resistance, and pretty soon it reaches a high enough level where the 10 volts drop is now supported entirely by the I^2R losses, as they are called. We all knew current can't increase forever. :)
So we have an exponential transition from pure Back EMF to a pure I*R voltage drop as a voltage is applied to a coil and current begins to flow.
Ok, that's enough for now, I don't want to upload to much of my knowledge or I'll start to fully believe it myself. LOL :)
EM
To further complicate this one must start to look at power factors and phasing schemes! Transmittion lines and antennas, and power grids.
To understand copper and how the mass of the copper atoms is floating inside the electron shell, we get the sense of sloshing back EM or CEMF. [NMR theory] There is a delay of 90 degrees between the voltage and the current and this translates into a very real and true angle in space.
The isotope chains in copper are magnetic and attach end to end precessing and connected on there ends between adjacent atoms. This is the bassis of David Hamels cones using Aluminum. The Nuclear magnetic field is weak in atoms but in copper aluminum and bismuth it is strong enough to couple with the electron shell for manipulation of the mass of the atoms, as the electrons shells are normally neutral or non magnetic.
A non energized copper wire therefore has an isotope chain in place already that is aligned the longest length of its mass. The nuclear magnetic field is running the wires length and precessing at the NMR frequency, a long magnetic chain with inertial momentum and spinning backwards of the electrons. A small counter EMF is already present setting at 90 degrees to the wire.
This is why scalar coils are felt to be charged without any actual currents in them, and why so many devices using coils and crystals generate torsion fields using no current whatsoever.
When a voltage hits the wire, before current even starts to flow, this neuclear alignment is resistant to the flow of electrons in the wire and delays them from being dislodged until a mass rotation occurs at the nucleus. The voltage vector at this point sits at 90 degrees to the coil, and we see it instantly arise in a wire passing through the center of the coil at 90 degrees in space. For this special case of coupling the voltage vector has no delay from the normal 90 degree lag in copper coils because it is already aligned to recieve it.
The instanious E field spike passes through to the 90 degree coil or conductor and can be viewed using a scope. This is TPU style effect, right out of NMR theory.
Now as the first coil begins to conduct electrons the mass of the copper atom at the nucleus begins to rotate into alignment with the new magnetic field on the electron shell and we discover the actual reason for the 90 degree phase shift in copper. The isotope chains are now broken between the atoms down the length of the wire and the mass tries to keep up with the E field wave as it changes. The nuclear magnetic field turing to try and catch the electron shell creates a reverse EM in the electron shell because its spin is the opposite direction. We see here now the reversed EM is out of phase with the initial EM hitting the coil.
Experiment using a spherical system of only copper exposes this for observations. The back EMF can never catch the forwards EMF in space because it cannot turn as fast. Nuclear rates are in the Mhz and Electron shell rates are in the microwave rates for ability to turn quickly. The mass of the nucleus is over 1000 times heavier then the electron shell so the nuclear field turns sluggish.
This splitting of the two fields in space during a changing E field, is the reason for both the effects describbed for back EMF and Counter EMF. The "back" indicates it is being generated on the "nucleus" of the atom which spins backwards to the forwards EM which is entirely electron shell mechnism. They may be describbed differently in electronics theory but in NMR theory a different model emerges.
This becomes more apparent when one starts to observe the NMR traces on scopes in copper wire using coils at 90 degrees. And here is where you begin to see that OU is possible, as there is obviously more energy resulting from a changing E field in coils then it takes to set up this turn. If both fields could be captured while they are split the energy gain is now only a function of how far you manage to split them in space. This is why the fast rise time of the square waves is criticle to harness the split time.
If the reverse field was being created at the electron shell, as the current and incomplete electronics theory indicates, then there would be no phase shift of voltage and current in copper wire at all, the reverse spin would be instant and current would never rise at all. The copper atoms would become diamagnetic and simply be repelled by any magnetic field present wether changing or not. There would be no E field spike on the leading edge at 90 degrees to the wires length.
I believe this is a case where two seperate fields of technology have yet to merge. Most electronics people are resistant to start opening the atom to this depth but here is where the true function lies. We can no longer turn a blind eye as OU engineers, to the depths of the atom and what is already known. The writesr of Lenz Law had no concept for this, it was discovered in the 50s.
The inertial spin momentum of the nuclear mass is normally countering the electrons spin of mass, when the two are split in angular alignment, both surge upwards as long as they remain out of phase. The copper not only reacts to current induced on its electron shell surface but it is also a generator of the forces moving through it which normally nearly cancel.
The back EMF is ever present in copper all the time, it is buried just below the surface as countering inertial momentum force.
Dave L
@ libra_spirit
Hi, libra. Several days ago i read your post above and some things started to make sense while others are over my head. what I do understand is a bit fuzzy still, even after reading your post for several days repeatedly.
I too have been asking the same questions, where does this impedance come from and what is the cause of the 90 degree phase shift, why is geometry so fundamental and has not been studied in detail. What would a triangle coil do as apposed to a square coil.
confirms what you are saying basically, i think... here is the phase shift
http://www.springerlink.com/content/pu43p4h827m34386/
And here..
http://books.google.com/books?id=DuOiW_N1yTAC&pg=PA410&lpg=PA410&dq=nuclear+spin+of+copper&source=web&ots=8Vvai1VM6s&sig=g2RcjtGGAHpHtsK9qARUXv7QJj4
So what I think your trying to say is that, voltage potential effects electrons, more so then current, and current effects nucleus spin, that electrons don't, and that the different spins are what creates the 90 degree phase shift. is this about right? and that current which is held back by entropy (nuclear field turns sluggish),
creates the phase shift.
So now if I look at a triangle coil, I think i might be able to see what is going on... You have a long wire which then has a sharp turn, and then a long wire again. The current hitting the turn point will be the interesting area. must experiment now... ;D
This is the first time I have ever been compelled to correct and error of this sort in public. No offence is intended to anyone.
Please note that electrodynamic momentum should not be confused with nuclear interactions as stated below. This is incorrect. If anyone reading this wants to gain a deep understanding of what is really going on then Carver Mead's book on Collective Electrodynamics is perhaps one of the best places to start. The entire first chapter of the excellent book is available on line here http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/94/12/6013?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=carver+mead&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT
For those who don't choose to follow up on Carver Meads excellent book then I suggest the following simplifications: Current is a kinetic phenomenon with momentum. Voltage is a potential phenomenon. In a closed system energy will oscillate harmonically back and forth between kinetic and potential forms. The 90 deg relationship between kinetic and potential energy is a fundamental property of our universe that we are all intuitively familiar with. Hang a weight on a spring -- pull it down to put some energy in and then let go of it -- it oscillates. There is a 90 deg relationship between the potential and kinetic energy in the system. Voltage is like the potential energy stored in the stretched (or compressed) spring... current has inertia like the weight moving. This is what's happening in a coil that you apply a voltage to -- Initially the voltage is maximum and the current is zero... as the current begins to flow the voltage drops. Once the current is flowing it has inertia and it doesn't want to stop -- it creates a flyback.
[ If you want to atempt to gain a grasp of things at the following two levels of understanding then I suggest picking up a copy of Roger Penrose's excellent book, The Road to Reality.]
At a deeper level for those with a little mathematical inclination picture the energy as a coherent thing -- it can be described by a complex number. The amount of energy is constant - this can be represented by a radius in the complex plane. The energy will orbit the origin in a circle - always remaining constant in magnitude but oscillating in it's makeup of imaginary (kinetic) and real (potential) parts.
At a much deeper level harmonic oscillation is an inevitable, and simple, consequence of any consistent system of two or more dimentions. Potential energy is just a measure of entropy and kinetic energy a flow of entropy. The energy is a single thing that exists in a 2 dimentional metric. Although a single thing the energy dimentions are related by a 90 deg phase relationship and are best represented as a complex number.
Mark.
Quote from: libra_spirit on December 26, 2007, 08:02:23 AM
To further complicate this one must start to look at power factors and phasing schemes! Transmittion lines and antennas, and power grids.
To understand copper and how the mass of the copper atoms is floating inside the electron shell, we get the sense of sloshing back EM or CEMF. [NMR theory] There is a delay of 90 degrees between the voltage and the current and this translates into a very real and true angle in space.
The isotope chains in copper are magnetic and attach end to end precessing and connected on there ends between adjacent atoms. This is the bassis of David Hamels cones using Aluminum. The Nuclear magnetic field is weak in atoms but in copper aluminum and bismuth it is strong enough to couple with the electron shell for manipulation of the mass of the atoms, as the electrons shells are normally neutral or non magnetic.
A non energized copper wire therefore has an isotope chain in place already that is aligned the longest length of its mass. The nuclear magnetic field is running the wires length and precessing at the NMR frequency, a long magnetic chain with inertial momentum and spinning backwards of the electrons. A small counter EMF is already present setting at 90 degrees to the wire.
This is why scalar coils are felt to be charged without any actual currents in them, and why so many devices using coils and crystals generate torsion fields using no current whatsoever.
When a voltage hits the wire, before current even starts to flow, this neuclear alignment is resistant to the flow of electrons in the wire and delays them from being dislodged until a mass rotation occurs at the nucleus. The voltage vector at this point sits at 90 degrees to the coil, and we see it instantly arise in a wire passing through the center of the coil at 90 degrees in space. For this special case of coupling the voltage vector has no delay from the normal 90 degree lag in copper coils because it is already aligned to recieve it.
The instanious E field spike passes through to the 90 degree coil or conductor and can be viewed using a scope. This is TPU style effect, right out of NMR theory.
Now as the first coil begins to conduct electrons the mass of the copper atom at the nucleus begins to rotate into alignment with the new magnetic field on the electron shell and we discover the actual reason for the 90 degree phase shift in copper. The isotope chains are now broken between the atoms down the length of the wire and the mass tries to keep up with the E field wave as it changes. The nuclear magnetic field turing to try and catch the electron shell creates a reverse EM in the electron shell because its spin is the opposite direction. We see here now the reversed EM is out of phase with the initial EM hitting the coil.
Experiment using a spherical system of only copper exposes this for observations. The back EMF can never catch the forwards EMF in space because it cannot turn as fast. Nuclear rates are in the Mhz and Electron shell rates are in the microwave rates for ability to turn quickly. The mass of the nucleus is over 1000 times heavier then the electron shell so the nuclear field turns sluggish.
This splitting of the two fields in space during a changing E field, is the reason for both the effects describbed for back EMF and Counter EMF. The "back" indicates it is being generated on the "nucleus" of the atom which spins backwards to the forwards EM which is entirely electron shell mechnism. They may be describbed differently in electronics theory but in NMR theory a different model emerges.
This becomes more apparent when one starts to observe the NMR traces on scopes in copper wire using coils at 90 degrees. And here is where you begin to see that OU is possible, as there is obviously more energy resulting from a changing E field in coils then it takes to set up this turn. If both fields could be captured while they are split the energy gain is now only a function of how far you manage to split them in space. This is why the fast rise time of the square waves is criticle to harness the split time.
If the reverse field was being created at the electron shell, as the current and incomplete electronics theory indicates, then there would be no phase shift of voltage and current in copper wire at all, the reverse spin would be instant and current would never rise at all. The copper atoms would become diamagnetic and simply be repelled by any magnetic field present wether changing or not. There would be no E field spike on the leading edge at 90 degrees to the wires length.
I believe this is a case where two seperate fields of technology have yet to merge. Most electronics people are resistant to start opening the atom to this depth but here is where the true function lies. We can no longer turn a blind eye as OU engineers, to the depths of the atom and what is already known. The writesr of Lenz Law had no concept for this, it was discovered in the 50s.
The inertial spin momentum of the nuclear mass is normally countering the electrons spin of mass, when the two are split in angular alignment, both surge upwards as long as they remain out of phase. The copper not only reacts to current induced on its electron shell surface but it is also a generator of the forces moving through it which normally nearly cancel.
The back EMF is ever present in copper all the time, it is buried just below the surface as countering inertial momentum force.
Dave L
No offense taken here. Where all just trying to learn. Thank you for your kind statement. I have read Rogers book many many years ago.. forgot about that...
I am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
These are the fundamental questions which no one seems to be answering?
I thank you for any responses you can provide!
Fred
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 29, 2007, 11:41:50 AM
I am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
These are the fundamental questions which no one seems to be answering?
I thank you for any responses you can provide!
Fred
Fred,
I'm sure I'll get torn apart here like usual, but here goes anyway. I'll try to answer some of your questions:
1) Think in terms of a STEP input to the coil...what happens? Well, the voltage
has to go up instantly to the steady-state value of the step input right? Keep in mind that voltage is measured
across the coil's terminals. But what of the coil
current? Well, we know that the fundamental characteristic of an inductor (coil) is that
its current can not change instantaneously, it resists change in current. So this means that the current must "charge" up
similar to how voltage charges up on a capacitor. This is what causes the current to "LAG" the voltage in an inductor.
2) Voltage placed across a coil will cause electron flow via attraction. Electrons migrate towards the positive terminal.
3) Electron flow
is the current. The electrons drift slowly towards the positive terminal, but crudely, as in the billiard ball effect, the "signal" is transfered to the other end almost instantaneously. Due to inductance however (whether it be a straight piece of wire or a coil), the current does not reach it's peak or maximum instantaneously, it takes time to get there, and the time is proportional to the inductance.
4) Refer to answers 1) and 2).
Fred,
I can offer some alternate models and views to the text answers that Mark has pointed to. My answers are often not the classic ones at all, as spin has not been dealt with in electronics theory at all.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
The magnetic field is a function of the current and does not appear until after current is flowing in the coil. The formula is based on only turns and current. So we see here a c velocity E field moving with no magnetic field component on its leading edge.
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
It rips them off there valence orbit in the copper atoms where they are orbiting at almost c velocity. This drops their energy during the hop between atoms where they move very slowly, [ 1 coloumb] and gives rise to heat losses in the wire. The exit causes a vibration on the shells in the heat frequency range. In electronics we call it wire resistance. As the electrons are ripped off and travel slowly down the wire hopping atoms, there is a third force generated by the atom pushing at 90 degrees to the B field and 90 degrees to the E field. This third force is only present during a change of current, and as the current comes up to a static level as with DC, the 90 degree motion producing force stops. All AC motors use this method to propell the coils. They are called induction motors.
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
If you view the E field as photons, [classic quantum physics], it is energizing the electron shells outer orbital shell. The shells absorb photons at a quantum level of energy referenced by planks constant. See NMR theory.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
Photons? Needles to say theoretically the E field can move down a wire and cause it to explode before current has started to flow. HV is some nasty stuff. How the classic theory people get photons flowing in a magnetic field is even harder for me to grasp as they must curve around the magnet in the air.
I have yet to see a good explination of how photons flow down the wire without shooting off it. But you can see there are two velocities for the energy, and what Bearden states is true, we can get energy through a wire without current.
1 - If the frequency is high enough there is no time for the electrons to hop. [Microwave waveguides]
2 - Photon flows, from either the electron shell or the Proton shell at c velocity, if the current is held by other means, such as spin alignment.
A capacitor has the strange ability to resist those photon flows! And delays the voltage from rising until 90 degrees after the current flows.
I would choose to explaine this with spin forces and how they align in the capacitor plates. The nuclear isotope line always links along the longest dimension of the copper. This prealigns the spin forces to interact differently with the conductor connected to it and alters its interaction with the photon flow.
This leads to the alternate view that if we flow E field down a wire inside a magnet with a prexisting magnetic field runing parallel with it, it will meet almost no resistance and electrons will avalanch without the delay. TPU is setup this way. The magnetic field preconditions the photon state of the shell and also aligns the spin to a zero resistance angle, and increases the NMR frequency as well. If we keep pulses short enough the spin will never turn from this angle, and presto zingo super conduction.
Unfortunatly photons want to move through the atom at 90 degrees to the electron flows spin angle, so it has to tilt back and forth moving between E field and B field sine type pulses both out of phase. If we restrict it to only a 90 degree tilt rather then a full 360 for sine waves then the velocity can be increased. Other options lock it into a 45 degree tilt with a forced precession, or a combination of frequencies and get a happy medium.
Dave L
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 29, 2007, 11:41:50 AM
No offense taken here. Where all just trying to learn. Thank you for your kind statement. I have read Rogers book many many years ago.. forgot about that...
I am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
These are the fundamental questions which no one seems to be answering?
I thank you for any responses you can provide!
Fred
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 29, 2007, 11:41:50 AM
I am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
These are the fundamental questions which no one seems to be answering?
Good -- keep asking the hard questions.
I asked the same questions -- and many more fundamental ones before grasping exactly what is going on. Before you can get deeper answers to what is happening you have to move past the formalism and simplifications used to describe what is happening. Here is a incomplete and grossly simplified list that may assist you in seeing how things work at a deeper level:
1. Fields do not exist -- they are just mathematical constructs used to simplify calculations.
2. Everything is waves.
3. Electrons, protons and neutrons are spin waves -- these are 3+1 dimensional things.
4. Although you can talk about the components of spinors they are really single 3+1 dimensional things.
5. Stable waves (spinors) a resonant solutions that are referred to as particles - a very misleading term.
6. Electrons do not orbit the nucleus -- the nucleus sits within the electron spinner.
7. Charge is spin of space and mass is compression of space.
7. Magnetism is just a relativistic view of the motion of a spinner.
8. Photons don't exist as a separate entity - a photon is just a formalism for describing the exchange of energy via resonant intereaction of two resonant waves.
now the really tough ones:
Potential (voltage) is a reduction of entropy -- it arises from a separation of positive and negative spinors which forces a greater degree of interaction and order. The consequence of this is that there is a statistical pressure for the separates spinors to flow towards equilibrium -- this is what current is.
How you view things depends on the problem you are trying to solve. Sometimes classical views are most usefull. At other times a more fundamental view is easier.
As to why things like current and voltage are at right angles in harmonic oscillators goes to the deepest level of the structure of a functioning universe -- the fundamental question is why do kinetic and potential energy combine in a single thing that preserves the energy as an endless oscillation where the energy appears to be all kinetic (current) at some times and all potential (voltage) at other times. You will understand the fundamental answer only when you see that the energy in a harmonic oscillator is at all times just a single thing... at and given time a snapshot of the energy will reveal the kinetic and potential aspects.
Once you understand what is happening in the simple case of a harmonic oscillation then the next challenge is truly understandsing what spin is and how something can only return to it's original form after rotating 2n times. -- a key here is to understand that spin is a 3+ dimensional thing while rotation is a 2 dimensional concept. In out universe it's actually spin that is a real thing and rotation that is a virtual thing -- just like a field.
The renders and animations I posted in this thread may help you understand spin http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2764.0.html
cheers
mark.
Quote from: MarkSnoswell on December 29, 2007, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 29, 2007, 11:41:50 AM
I am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
These are the fundamental questions which no one seems to be answering?
Good -- keep asking the hard questions.
I asked the same questions -- and many more fundamental ones before grasping exactly what is going on. Before you can get deeper answers to what is happening you have to move past the formalism and simplifications used to describe what is happening. Here is a incomplete and grossly simplified list that may assist you in seeing how things work at a deeper level:
1. Fields do not exist -- they are just mathematical constructs used to simplify calculations.
2. Everything is waves.
3. Electrons, protons and neutrons are spin waves -- these are 3+1 dimensional things.
4. Although you can talk about the components of spinors they are really single 3+1 dimensional things.
5. Stable waves (spinors) a resonant solutions that are referred to as particles - a very misleading term.
6. Electrons do not orbit the nucleus -- the nucleus sits within the electron spinner.
7. Charge is spin of space and mass is compression of space.
7. Magnetism is just a relativistic view of the motion of a spinner.
8. Photons don't exist as a separate entity - a photon is just a formalism for describing the exchange of energy via resonant intereaction of two resonant waves.
now the really tough ones:
Potential (voltage) is a reduction of entropy -- it arises from a separation of positive and negative spinors which forces a greater degree of interaction and order. The consequence of this is that there is a statistical pressure for the separates spinors to flow towards equilibrium -- this is what current is.
How you view things depends on the problem you are trying to solve. Sometimes classical views are most usefull. At other times a more fundamental view is easier.
As to why things like current and voltage are at right angles in harmonic oscillators goes to the deepest level of the structure of a functioning universe -- the fundamental question is why do kinetic and potential energy combine in a single thing that preserves the energy as an endless oscillation where the energy appears to be all kinetic (current) at some times and all potential (voltage) at other times. You will understand the fundamental answer only when you see that the energy in a harmonic oscillator is at all times just a single thing... at and given time a snapshot of the energy will reveal the kinetic and potential aspects.
Once you understand what is happening in the simple case of a harmonic oscillation then the next challenge is truly understandsing what spin is and how something can only return to it's original form after rotating 2n times. -- a key here is to understand that spin is a 3+ dimensional thing while rotation is a 2 dimensional concept. In out universe it's actually spin that is a real thing and rotation that is a virtual thing -- just like a field.
The renders and animations I posted in this thread may help you understand spin http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2764.0.html
cheers
mark.
"6. Electrons do not orbit the nucleus -- the nucleus sits within the electron spinner.
7. Charge is spin of space and mass is compression of space.
7. Magnetism is just a relativistic view of the motion of a spinner."
I have questions about these statements. Do you have a picture diagram of number 6?
Also, since "charge is spin of space and mass is compression of space", if this is the case; what causes spin to occur and what causes compression of space to occur?
Can you explain why magnetism is just a relativistic view of the motion of a spinner? Do spinners produce charges that strike each other when two magnets are in repel to one another? What is it that we feel when we put two magnets in repulsion to one another?
Thanks for your thoughts.
QuoteI am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
I was under the impression Fred was asking for a simplified explanation, not a thesis or PhD-level discourse.
Oh well, perhaps I was mistaken.
Quote from: Liberty on December 29, 2007, 04:40:00 PM
I have questions about these statements. Do you have a picture diagram of number 6?
Also, since "charge is spin of space and mass is compression of space", if this is the case; what causes spin to occur and what causes compression of space to occur?
Can you explain why magnetism is just a relativistic view of the motion of a spinner? Do spinners produce charges that strike each other when two magnets are in repel to one another? What is it that we feel when we put two magnets in repulsion to one another?
The fundamental questions are the hardest to answer as it takes a vision of concepts that are simply not taught. Often the more someone has learnt already the harder it is for them to see beyond the walls of their own learning.
I have other demands on my time that require I cut this discussion short -- I strongly suggest that you read the books I suggested. For spinors there are almost no concepts and animations outside the ones I have posted in the thread here http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2764.0.html
cheers
Mark.
Umm , not wishing to get caught up in the technical discussions here too much . . . . . Ok, so back EMf (or whatever you wish to call it) occurs when i energise a coil BUT when i shut off the power, the return energy comes out so fast that even a Schottky has trouble swiching it.
Ok, this might sound odd, but has anyone tried to slow down the return pulse so that it could be more efficiently reclaimed?
Or, failing that, are there any faster switches that might do it better?
I thank you for all your fantastic reply's ;D. I didn't realize that their where several different disciplines available. I have been into electronics for 30 years as a repair tech, so I have kept up with the basics from school, but after that I have been hunting for alternative information that was more, in dept and what is going on within the material, atoms, structure, electrons etc... Much has changed. I did look into spinor theory and I believe I understood the basics, thank you for pointing it out!
My objective lately has been to study material physics since I believe it might answer many of my questions, I just found it odd that, a coil which is wound in a circle (geometry), concentration of forces (magnetic fields), movement of current and voltage within a geometrical electrified object could be so complex. The more I found out the more I wanted to find out. Your reply and insights will guide me to further investigation.
It will take me a weeks to absorb what has been stated. Thank you all again!
Fred
@magnusx
The problem is that the potential is so high that it burns out most silicon devices. I have popped large sums of mosfets, diodes & bridges. I overrate everything by at least 30% or more and it still happens. The pure potential is hard and too fast to control. That downward reversed polarity coil discharge is pure radiant energy.
Quote from: magnusx on December 30, 2007, 02:01:02 AM
...when i shut off the power, the return energy comes out so fast that even a Schottky has trouble swiching it.
Ok, this might sound odd, but has anyone tried to slow down the return pulse so that it could be more efficiently reclaimed?
Or, failing that, are there any faster switches that might do it better?
This certainly deserves a post of its own in the
Electrical Faux Pas thread.
What is "fast"? By what standard is the speed being measured to?
Rise time? Volts per microsecond?
Why does everyone assume that
inductive kickback is so much "faster" than anything we might achieve with a signal generator or some other means? It is not. It is also not ou.
There is nothing extraordinary about inductive kickback other than it makes a very handy "source" to step charge high voltage capacitors. It is simply the release of magnetic flux in the form of voltage and current, which btw remains balanced in energy regardless of the load during this release phase. If the IK voltage is too high for your liking, place a load across the coil and trade off some
peak voltage for
peak duration.
If you want to "capture" IK without killing your components or equipment, again....put a load on it! With a suitable load, a common MUR1520 or MUR820 diode will work quite nicely to safely isolate your IK capture circuit.
@Fred
Quote
The pure potential is hard and too fast to control. That downward reversed polarity coil discharge is pure radiant energy.
If there is any RE from IK, then the effect is probably very small.
Tesla built more coils than all of us put together will ever build in our life times, yet he did not use IK to directly create his RE effects. Why not? He did however use IK as a means of
charging the capacitors in his disruptive discharge apparatus, which utilized a spark gap to perform the abrupt switching necessary to create the RE effects.
Doing things this way gave him much more precise control over the voltage used for the disruptive discharge, AND the rise time of the spark gap switch is much faster than what can be achieved with IK alone.
Quote from: z_p_e on December 30, 2007, 07:51:47 AM
Quote from: magnusx on December 30, 2007, 02:01:02 AM
...when i shut off the power, the return energy comes out so fast that even a Schottky has trouble swiching it.
Ok, this might sound odd, but has anyone tried to slow down the return pulse so that it could be more efficiently reclaimed?
Or, failing that, are there any faster switches that might do it better?
This certainly deserves a post of its own in the Electrical Faux Pas thread.
What is "fast"? By what standard is the speed being measured to?
Rise time? Volts per microsecond?
Why does everyone assume that inductive kickback is so much "faster" than anything we might achieve with a signal generator or some other means? It is not. It is also not ou.
There is nothing extraordinary about inductive kickback other than it makes a very handy "source" to step charge high voltage capacitors. It is simply the release of magnetic flux in the form of voltage and current, which btw remains balanced in energy regardless of the load during this release phase. If the IK voltage is too high for your liking, place a load across the coil and trade off some peak voltage for peak duration.
If you want to "capture" IK without killing your components or equipment, again....put a load on it! With a suitable load, a common MUR1520 or MUR820 diode will work quite nicely to safely isolate your IK capture circuit.
@Fred
Quote
The pure potential is hard and too fast to control. That downward reversed polarity coil discharge is pure radiant energy.
If there is any RE from IK, then the effect is probably very small.
Tesla built more coils than all of us put together will ever build in our life times, yet he did not use IK to directly create his RE effects. Why not? He did however use IK as a means of charging the capacitors in his disruptive discharge apparatus, which utilized a spark gap to perform the abrupt switching necessary to create the RE effects.
Doing things this way gave him much more precise control over the voltage used for the disruptive discharge, AND the rise time of the spark gap switch is much faster than what can be achieved with IK alone.
If voltage is a problem, consider using a step down transformer in series with a diode. It will handle a pulse dc output and step it down to a more useable level. The transformer will have only a little loss. It also provides a better high impedance match for the BEMF output coil.
@ Z_P_E
Calling upon an unwritten violation of electrical social order and good manners (good housekeeping seal of approval),"Faux Pas" in this statement is equivalent to me taking my several thousand dollars worth oscilloscopes and test equipment out to the garbage bin because they can't be used to measure voltage, current, time and yes...changing velocity!
What exactly do you think your signal generator is putting out? Frequency, or more to the point, (in an unstable form) frequency shift. (other wording ?changing velocity). ;)
My belief is that as something goes up (against gravity) it takes more time/energy then when it's going down (with gravity, gaining energy), my scope traces don't lie, even with quantum mechanics and general/special theory of relativity this is so. (which i have checked)
In the above posts Libra-spirit gives hints to this, as mass shifts, drift velocity of electrons as opposed to electrons gaining energy (gaining velocity), and photon movement at C. Velocity plays a significant role.
From what I have seen, OU is there. It's at the peak, during reversal, and through the drop. The energy gains momentum (gravity), orders it ?self, is intense, high energy, velocity changing, reverse polarity half of a dc pulse. And Tesla was right-radiant.
Tesla (he is my demy-god, by the way :) LOL -did not have or use semi-conductors around during his time, I rest my case on that statement.
I'm looking for alternative ways of hookup. Your comments about faster diodes, caps and transformers is noted and appreciated. The problem that I have seen is that as soon as a load other then a capacitor on the out is applied I loose it drastically, maybe I?m doing something wrong in my output hookup???
@ Liberty, I?ll try it, sounds about right.
I will always appreciate your comments, and don?t take mine as the only one, since I probably don?t know very much either. Don?t take my words offensively, for they are not meant as such. We are all here trying to learn from each other and to have a little fun doing it. You are all very knowledgeable with different disciplines, different schooling, (which I just found out). This makes us all very unique. ;D
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 30, 2007, 12:39:05 PM
@ Z_P_E
Calling upon an unwritten violation of electrical social order and good manners (good housekeeping seal of approval),"Faux Pas" in this statement is equivalent to me taking my several thousand dollars worth oscilloscopes and test equipment out to the garbage bin because they can't be used to measure voltage, current, time and yes...changing velocity!
What exactly do you think your signal generator is putting out? Frequency, or more to the point, (in an unstable form) frequency shift. (other wording ?changing velocity). ;)
My belief is that as something goes up (against gravity) it takes more time/energy then when it's going down (with gravity, gaining energy), my scope traces don't lie, even with quantum mechanics and general/special theory of relativity this is so. (which i have checked)
In the above posts Libra-spirit gives hints to this, as mass shifts, drift velocity of electrons as opposed to electrons gaining energy (gaining velocity), and photon movement at C. Velocity plays a significant role.
From what I have seen, OU is there. It's at the peak, during reversal, and through the drop. The energy gains momentum (gravity), orders it ?self, is intense, high energy, velocity changing, reverse polarity half of a dc pulse. And Tesla was right-radiant.
??? Huh? What is it you are trying to say here?
Quote
Tesla (he is my demy-god, by the way :) LOL -did not have or use semi-conductors around during his time, I rest my case on that statement.
What case? Who said anything about semiconductors? It is irrelevant to this discussion. The point is that he used capacitive discharge, not IK. He had the capability at that time to do both.
Quote
I'm looking for alternative ways of hookup. Your comments about faster diodes, caps and transformers is noted and appreciated. The problem that I have seen is that as soon as a load other then a capacitor on the out is applied I loose it drastically, maybe I?m doing something wrong in my output hookup???
Again ???
What is it you are trying to do exactly? You lose
what exactly?
If it is the high voltage peak you are speaking of, then OF COURSE IT WILL BE REDUCED WITH ANYTHING OTHER THAN A CAP LOAD. All due respect, but with 30 years as a tech, you should know that a cap poses absolutely no load once it is charged up to its source peak voltage.
The whole point is to capture the IK WITHOUT destroying other components in your circuit, and your test equipment. It matters not whether you collect a 100A 1us pulse (high Vp) or a 1A 100us pulse (low Vp), it is the same total energy isn't it?
I would encourage you to check your foundation with the basics before delving into the esoteric.
Well, I guess I stuck my foot in on that one...
@ZPE... I can tell your a good individual, and don't take this the wrong way.. I wish you would read what you, I and others post prior to posting and saying "what?" and "what are you trying to say?"...as it's already all right their, everything you need to know. what more can i say..
Whle you two girls are rolling onthe floor, pulling each other's hair, I wanted to mention that the discharge of an inductor produces a very strong EMF, and the discharge of a capacitor produces a very strong MMF.
@Grumpy - lol ;D what is MMF?
@libra spirit Quotethere is a third force generated by the atom pushing at 90 degrees to the B field and 90 degrees to the E field.
This third force is only present during a change of current, and as the current comes up to a static level as with DC, the 90 degree motion producing force stops. All AC motors use this method to propell the coils. They are called induction motors.
what is the 3rd force you referr to? current,magnetics?
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 30, 2007, 11:27:19 PM
Well, I guess I stuck my foot in on that one...
@ZPE... I can tell your a good individual, and don't take this the wrong way.. I wish you would read what you, I and others post prior to posting and saying "what?" and "what are you trying to say?"...as it's already all right their, everything you need to know. what more can i say..
By the same token, you should read what you write prior to hitting that "post" button.
Of course I read that first lot of yours several times, and I was unable to ascertain what it had to do with the topic at hand, what it had to do with my prior post, and what it had to do with anything at all. Most of it was nonsense, and off topic. The only point I think I
was able to extract from it was that you still believe IK is a form of ou.
Well, as I said before, Tesla had the ability to create both IK and capacitive discharge. If you believe IK is the path to ou, why then did Tesla use capacitive discharge instead?
Quote from: quantum1024 on December 31, 2007, 04:47:49 AM
@Grumpy - lol ;D what is MMF?
EMF = Electro Motive Force
MMF = Magneto Motive Force
Tesla used capacitor discharge and hence MMF - Steinmetz showed mathematically that a very large inductor (and hence EMF) would also work.
@z_p_e
I found that capacitive discharge makes things move faster. I mean if I hit my small TPU mock-up with 12 volts DC from my power supply, nothing much happens, but when I charge a capacitor to 12 volts and discharge it into the same TPU, I can feel the vertical wires flex or kick and I can hear a pop.
Grumpy says an inductor will discharge EMF and a capacitor will discharge MMF. Can you give an example of an inductor that can discharge enough of something to be called a discharge. Would the stator coils of a 3 hp DC motor qualify as an inductor cause I saw this discharge back into our on/off switch and smash it to bits.
QuoteI am looking for a more basic and fundamental answer to what is happening in a coil.
1) Why is the voltage potential already far far ahead in a coil, what is the voltage potential anyway in a coil?
2) what is the voltage potential (or wave) doing to electrons? as it passes them?
3) what does current do to to the electrons? and how does it effect them during transfer.
4) if voltage is ahead in a coil by 90deg, does it build a magnetic field or is this strictly a combination of current and voltage or just current?
These are the fundamental questions which no one seems to be answering?
I thank you for any responses you can provide!
Fred
Fred, don't listen to us, we will only confuse you!!Ã, Ã, LOLÃ, :D
Here I go:
1) Ã, The basic inductor equation is:Ã, Ã, V = L di/dt
Ã, Ã, Ã, What does it mean?
Ã, Ã, Ã, It means the rate of change of the current (di/dt)Ã, is proportional to the applied voltage (by constant L, the inductance)
Ã, Ã, So if you apply a step voltage function of lets say 1 V for t>0,Ã, Ã, and the inductance is L=1,Ã, the di/dt will be equal to 1, which says, the current is increasing at 1 Amp per second.Ã, Ã, The current does NOT lag due to charging up of the "capacitor" like zpe is imagining.Ã, Ã,Â
Ã, Ã, The "lagging" is simply due to this inductive phenomena which is similar to inertia.Ã, Ã, Let current be equal to velocity and force equal to voltage and you see that if you apply a force to an object it doesn't istantly go 1000 miles/hour or whatever.Ã, Ã,Â
Ã, Ã, It's the way nature operates and equations try to capture this behaviour.
Ã, Ã, And by the way, the term "lagging" and "leading" are used with more precision when talking about sinusoidal excitation of inductor and capacitors.
Ã, So if an AC sinusoid of a particular frequency is driving an inductor, the voltage wavform hits a peak 90 degrees in phase before the inductor current hits it's peak, so we say the voltage form "leads" the current in an inductor, or the inductor current "laggs" the voltage by 90 degree phase.Ã, Again it's all due to this inertial like aspect.Ã, Ã, I'm sure there could be subtle subatomic/space time explantions for all of this but I'm not an expert in that field.
2) Ã, The voltage potential simply ACCELERATES electrons.Ã, Ã, Force on a charge is simply F= E x q, where 'E' is the Electric field, and 'q' the charge.Ã, Ã, However, in a conductor carring DC, the charges do not ACCELERATE, they have reached a STEADY STATE value, but there is an E-field in the conductor.Ã, What's preventing them from accelerating?Ã, It's a type of terminal velocity, or drift velocity they reach due to the resitive effect in the wire, it is calculated that the velocity of electrons in the conductor is so small like 1 mm / minute or some other ridiculous slow speed.Ã, Ã, So how does the message get to the end so fast?Ã, Ã, Well, we are told that if you push one electron in at one end another one will pop out at the other end, and each other electron inbetween simple shifts over, so there is no need to travers a long length, it's simply a shift.Ã, And of course, the E-field propages at the speed of light in the conductors (which I realy don't know about, but on the outside it certainly propagates at that speed in free space)
3) I answered that in (2) above.Ã, But let me clarify, current is electrons or positive charges in motion.Ã, What your asking is like saying what does flow rate do to the water, or what does windspeed do to the air molecules.
4) No, voltage does not build up the magnetic field in the coil, it's the current that does that.Ã, Ã, The magnetic field created is in phase with the current in the coil, and it too lags the voltage by 90 degrees.Ã, So current and magnetic field go hand in hand.
EMdevices
@ Libra
I can tell you're on your NMR path again.Ã, Ã, But I'm telling you man, it's a weak phenomena.Ã, I was big on NMR a while ago as well but I gave that up.Ã, Ã, I know exactly what you are talking about, the precession (Larmor frequency) etc..
Believe me, it has it's place, but you're taking it to extremes if you're trying to explain everything with it.
I suggest you read up on Microwave circulators and how they work.Ã, Your cell phone has one in it.Ã, Ã, It's all about the precession of the magnetic domains and they create a one way flow around the circulator.Ã, Like those european circular intersections where everybody needs to go one way (either clockwise or counter-clockwise) You will find a lot of electrodynamics involved and this precession concept. This is one system where you can definitely measure the precession, but simple NMR produces such a weak field, and in copper, forget it, the ringing you observe on your scope is electrodynamic in nature, classical EM whatever you want to call it.
EMdevicesÃ,Â
Quote from: wattsup on December 31, 2007, 10:09:49 AM
@z_p_e
I found that capacitive discharge makes things move faster. I mean if I hit my small TPU mock-up with 12 volts DC from my power supply, nothing much happens, but when I charge a capacitor to 12 volts and discharge it into the same TPU, I can feel the vertical wires flex or kick and I can hear a pop.
Grumpy says an inductor will discharge EMF and a capacitor will discharge MMF. Can you give an example of an inductor that can discharge enough of something to be called a discharge. Would the stator coils of a 3 hp DC motor qualify as an inductor cause I saw this discharge back into our on/off switch and smash it to bits.
Capacitors and Inductors are beautifully complementary.
You could call an inductor a "flux capacitor".
When an inductor is energized, the source voltage appears
instantly across it, whereas the current, and hence flux takes time to increase. After fully energizing your coil with a steady DC for eg. and you cleanly disconnect it from the supply, the IK results in a reverse voltage, which again appears
instantly across the coil terminals. The magnitude and duration of this reverse voltage is proportional to the amount of flux that was stored in your "flux capacitor" the moment the input current ceased, AND the amount of load across its terminals. It is the current and flux that "discharges" in an inductor during this phase.
The psuedo corollary in a sense is that capacitors work much the same way, but in reverse to inductors. Capacitors take time to charge to their source voltage, but the highest current required is at the instant juice is connected to it. When the cap is discharged, again the current is
instantly at a max, whereas the voltage discharges at its natural rate.
According to Maxwell, and the way I usually regard it, is
EMF is simply the potential difference
across something. The other way it is generally regarded is through Faraday's law of induction, in that a moving magnetic flux will induce an emf in a conductor. EMF -> Volts
A nice simple definition I found on another forum for
MMF is:
QuoteIn simple terms, magnetomotive force is the effort exerted in creating a magnetic field. Increasing either the number of turns or the current in the coil will increase the mmf. The same changes will also increase the flux if the medium in which the coil is can carry more flux. To find the magnitude of the mmf a formular
mmf=turns x current
Now to summarize Grumpy, he said (and I add):
A discharging inductor -> Strong EMF -> Volts/Potential -> Faraday's induction
A discharging capacitor -> Strong MMF -> Amp-turns -> change in flux
So Grumpy can correct me if need be, but I think he is saying the following:
From what I mentioned above, a discharging inductor yields its highest (strongest)
potential (or EMF) at the moment forward current ceases. A discharging capacitor on the other hand, yields its highest (strongest)
current (and hence MMF) at the moment it's connected to it's load.
Hope that was helpful.
Darren
ZPE is correct.
Yes, you need a very large inductor. The circuit that this energy is discharged into is very important to produce the desired effects.
Tesla seems to have preferred the Leyden Jar (capacitor) and stated that it's discharge was stronger than any explosive.
@ZPE - Perhaps I misunderstood you. Sorry.
You have mentioned "IK" several times, perhaps this too is misunderstood, what does this stand for?
why then did Tesla use capacitive discharge instead? I don't know, but my best guess would be that, because he was using such high potential, that this was the easiest way to handle it, he did discharge it through another conductor according to his patents, perhaps this has something to do with it. The unloading of large capacitance in a very short burst into an inductor was a prime factor perhaps in creating the OU effect. best guess...
Capacitors and Inductors are beautifully complementary. YES!!!
@wattsup - The edwin gray system used capacitive discharge. in 3 phase. see patents.
@EMdevices - LOL - AHAAAA!!!!!!! Got it..... the lights turn on..... ;D ;D "shift"
@ZPE: I'm glad I asked the question of what MMF was, thank you for your description!!! YES this all makes sense now... ;D ;D
Thank you all for your comments!!
@quantum 1024
Quotewhy then did Tesla use capacitive discharge instead?
What everyone is describing is called Teslas "method of conversion" that is to charge an inductor with intermittent DC current, and collect the inductive discharges in a capacitor. When an inductor is charged with DC current the intensity of its magnetic field is described by the "amp-turns" of the coil and when the magnetic field discharges the voltage it produces is described by the "rate-of-change" of the flux. The important thing to remember here is that the discharge current has an infinate potential and can charge the capacitor to 40 times the supply voltage or more. It gets even more interesting when you consider what happens as the capacitor charges, whenever the capacitor voltage exceeds the supply voltage the inductor must "transform" more current into potential or voltage and at some point the inductive discharge can become pure potential, that is no current flow. I believe this is the "why" of teslas method of conversion, that is to charge a capacitor using a minimum amount of current. The question nobody seems to want to ask is "what qualities does this discharge current have that seperates it from conventional current?". One clue is that this discharge current of thousands of volts discharged in an instant will obliterate all semiconductors in its path and in its surroundings as well, it will vaporize small copper conductors too.
Energy (not power) Energy
@allcanadian ? more beer! You have stated the words I have wanted to say most eloquently, that is exactly the description that was on the tip of my thoughts but I couldn?t bring it out. The energy is everywhere, the waveform is everywhere. Each time I hit this ?high peak point, resonance?- ?something I can?t explain very well? I start blowing up components. The potentials go through the roof. I scaled down my circuits and am now running around 200v. but still this is too much. Thank you for your accurate description.
1)
Quotethe discharge current has an infinite potential ? ?I think this is based on the turns ratio, the more turns the higher the conversion of current to voltage potential?
, oopppssss..
you said "discharge current"....uhmmmmm.. now I'm confused.
2)
Quotewhenever the capacitor voltage exceeds the supply voltage the inductor must "transform" more current into potential or voltage and at some point the inductive discharge can become pure potential, that is no current flow.
?
I think that is the reason that Tesla was working on his spark gap speed?, I personally do not understand this statement however, because there is just too much going on in a short period of time. THIS statement requires some discussion.
3) what qualities does this discharge current have that separates it from conventional current?" , ?it?s cold, it?s cold running, it?s a different type of spark, it?s certainly got more energy?, perhaps this statement requires more discussion on how to detect it and what to look for.?
yup
@quantum1024
1)
Quotethe discharge current has an infinite potential ? ?I think this is based on the turns ratio, the more turns the higher the conversion of current to voltage potential?
, oopppssss.. you said "discharge current"....uhmmmmm.. now I'm confused.
Think of it this way, the charging of an inductor is based on the ampere-turns--- the amount of current running through each turn of the wire in an inductor, more current = more flux, more turns carrying the same current flow = more flux. The inductive discharge voltage is based on the rate of change of the flux, that is how long it takes the magnetic field of the inductor to collapse based on the amount of resistance. A capacitor charged by an inductive discharge can be considered a variable resistance because as the voltage on the capacitor rises it offers a greater resistance to the inductive discharge forcing the inductance to raise its voltage to overcome this resistance, it "transforms" more current into potential as the capacitor voltage rises. Teslas "method of conversion" is a transformer.
I refer to the energy in discharging inductors and capacitors as "discharge current" because it is not conventional current, nobody wants to ask the question "why" an inductor or capacitor can discharge almost instantaneously. The answer I have found is that the frequency of the current is different, not the frequency you measure but the vibration in matter due to its electrical tension, imagine trying to poke a blunt stick into sand, you would find there is a great amount of resistance. Now vibrate the stick at 100 Hz or more and you will find the stick moves through the sand with very little resistance, almost as if the sand became "fluid" --- because it did.
2. tesla used spark gaps in his earlier devices but overcame this shortcoming in later devices.
3.
Quotewhat qualities does this discharge current have that separates it from conventional current?" , ?it?s cold, it?s cold running, it?s a different type of spark, it?s certainly got more energy?, perhaps this statement requires more discussion on how to detect it and what to look for.?
Hmmm... the discharge current is cold and as grumpy said its kinetic?
Does this sound like anything we know? Science tells me whenever something moves it gets hotter due to friction, heat being one of the lowest forms of energy and following the laws of entropy. But the discharge current does not, it could be that a capacitor that is charged higher than the supply voltage by inductive discharges no longer follows electromagnetic induction laws nor Lenz law, it follows teslas electrostatic induction laws.
This link explains it better than I can-----http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm
Best of luck and a happy new year to everyone
Look at this............
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NGLF9isoZw&NR=1
Quote from: allcanadian on January 02, 2008, 12:56:50 AM
This link explains it better than I can-----http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm
and that link lead me to this one: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-721789270445596549
cool...
This is a little question but has been nagging me for a while.
If a capacitor is the same as an inductor (in an inverse way), is there an equivelant CEMF/BEMF observed with capaitors too?
Yikes!!! still absorbing that statement, I got it thought.. Your right, it is discharge current!!!
Tesla spoke of radiant matter. Your description fits this nicely. ;D
Does anyone have other good links to Teslas electrostatic induction laws?
Quote from: gyulasun on September 09, 2007, 05:16:20 PM
Do the magnetic poles change just because current is switched off in a coil?
Quote from: BEP on September 09, 2007, 08:24:18 PM
The poles reverse because the field is moving in the opposite direction ââ,¬â€œ collapsing instead of expanding.
The inductor wants to keep current flowing in the same direction after the current is switched off, thus the flux which is disengaging from the core will cut the wires in a direction that keeps the current flowing in the same direction. This means the poles do not reverse after the coil is opened. There is an internal field and an external field. The internal field is pointing in the opposite direction as the external or applied field. The internal field is a demagnetizing field, which means it works against the external or applied field. It is this internal field which cuts the coil in the opposite direction as the external field when it disengages from the core, which keeps current flowing in the same direction without the poles reversing. The internal field is
moving (collapsing instead of expanding), but it's
pointing in the opposite direction also, thus it's relative movement/pointing cancels each other and there is no pole reversal.
It's similar to a magnet approaching (
moving towards) a coil with it's North pole, while departing from the coil with it's South pole (
pointing in the opposite direction). There will be no pole reversal in the coil in this case. The magnet is moving in opposite directions relative to it's approach and departure from the coil, but the field is also pointing in opposite directions relative to it's approach and departure and the coil will have no pole reversal. This maybe isn't the best analogy, but I think it's helpful in visualizing this.
GB