Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[marathonman]

Correct

Please don't get bent just get educated.

UFOP;

You my friend get a shiny gold star on your forehead for being absolutely correct.
Figuera's part G was completely insulated with his thick winding's embedded directly in the insulator....aka commutator bars. not only does this quote prove that but what he calls resistance is actually the winding's around the insulated iron cylinder. just like a modified variac but with DC and inductance.

QUOTE;
"The different pieces of the resistance will connect, as seen in the drawing, with the commutator bars embedded in a cylinder of insulating material that does not move; but around it, and always in contact with more than one contact, rotates a brush “O”, which carries the foreign current, revolves. One of the ends of the resistance is connected with electromagnets N, and the other with electromagnets S.

please remember the resistance box in the patent does not exist. it is just to describe the function in elementary form

so you see my friend you are the star pupil of the day.
and i see you actually study the patent not skim through it like most.

welcome to the real world of Figuera.

MM

[hanon1492]

I wont waste more time in that. If you want to see a toroid with thick wire, Others may see a Picasso's picture.

Just to correct something I read before: the electromagnets strength just depends on the Ampere•Turns (N•I) , not in the voltage. Voltage is just the "pressure" required to overcome the "friction" in the circuit (impedance). Some electromagnets with low impedance will need just 12V to get 10A flowing, while others electromagnets with higher impedance will need 50 V to get the same 10A flowing.

Intensity = Voltage / Impedance


the next equation is for the force of an electromagnet:



When dealing with PSUs I guess there are two types: sources of voltage and sources of current. Something to take into account. A battery is a source of voltage I think.

[Ufopolitics]

Just to correct something I read before: the electromagnets strength just depends on the Ampere•Turns (N•I) , not in the voltage.

Really Hanon?

Ampere Turns Equals MMF, which is the analogous to EMF...which bolts down to Voltage...

Voltage is just the "pressure" required to overcome the "friction" in the circuit (impedance). Some electromagnets with low impedance will need just 12V to get 10A flowing, while others electromagnets with higher impedance will need 50 V to get the same 10A flowing.

Intensity = Voltage / Impedance


the next equation is for the force of an electromagnet:



When dealing with PSUs I guess there are two types: sources of voltage and sources of current. Something to take into account. A battery is a source of voltage I think.

In that Formula above...note the "n" which means number of turns or MMF, or EMF, or Voltage (all same deal) is multiplied by "i" plus squared together times "i" or Intensity or Amperage, or Flux, or Current.

BOTH Parameters are required to drive and generate the proper magnetic field...Volts and Amperage...Either one goes too low...not good.

Refer to basic Ohms Law Equation...then see the way V and I relates...

Also go over Hopkinson Law...


Take care


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Ampere's Law

Ampere's Law answers the question of magnetic field dependence on current, not voltage. The current through a particular coil with certain conditions will require a certain voltage applied.

An illustration is a copper coil producing an mmf of, say, 250 AT (Ampere Turns). The coil requires 10 Amperes with 5 Volts at room temperature. At a lower temperature the resistance of the copper coil decreases and 250 AT is achieved with 10A and 4V. Even lower temperature; 250 AT, 10A with 3V and so on until absolute zero where 250 AT is achieved with 10A and no applied voltage. Obviously 0K isn't going to happen, but the voltage independence of the magnetic field illustrated. Also the fact that mmf need not consume power with the undesirable heat byproduct hence the use of superconducting coils where extremely strong magnetic fields are required.

bi

[marathonman]

Stop running

Apparently ignoring the facts in front of the face is easier to deal with when it comes to part G, so living in fantasy land is easier than reality.

Peter Pan strikes again, or Picasso if you so choose.

MM

[hanon1492]

Ampere's Law answers the question of magnetic field dependence on current, not voltage. The current through a particular coil with certain conditions will require a certain voltage applied.

An illustration is a copper coil producing an mmf of, say, 250 AT (Ampere Turns). The coil requires 10 Amperes with 5 Volts at room temperature. At a lower temperature the resistance of the copper coil decreases and 250 AT is achieved with 10A and 4V. Even lower temperature; 250 AT, 10A with 3V and so on until absolute zero where 250 AT is achieved with 10A and no applied voltage. Obviously 0K isn't going to happen, but the voltage independence of the magnetic field illustrated. Also the fact that mmf need not consume power with the undesirable heat byproduct hence the use of superconducting coils where extremely strong magnetic fields are required.

bi

It can not be explained any better than that. At the end, intensity is what really matter in magnetic fields. Or better said: Ampere•Turns

[Ufopolitics]

Ampere's Law answers the question of magnetic field dependence on current, not voltage.

Hello Bistander,

We can not be that "radical" discriminating voltage to that point above.

Voltage and Amperage are in continuous relation, even though both are inversely proportional.

The current through a particular coil with certain conditions will require a certain voltage applied.

Exactly, each coil, depending on its spec's will require a given V and so an amperage.

If we do the Hydrodynamic analogy, just like Maxwell did to explain this phenomena on his paper: "On Physical Lines of Force"... I believe it would be understood better.

1-For example a very fine wire coil, will not require such high amperage, however, it would demand a higher voltage to generate the proper magnetic field.

2-The opposite works inversely, a coil with very coarse wire, higher gauge, will work fine at lower voltage but will demand higher currents in order to produce, say, the same field as prior example.

The analogy could be used -for example 1- as a very fine tubing conducting a fluid...wrapped up as a serpentine...the density of fluid per square area of that fine tubing would be minimal...however, in order to push it forward, creating a flow within serpentine would require greater pressure. Density of fluid= amperage while pressure effected on fluid =voltage.

We could simply state above parameters related to electricity as: V>A for above example.

Example 2 on same serpentine but, of a thicker tubing would require a much higher density of fluid per square area...while the pressure to get it flowing would be minimal, so we have V<A

An illustration is a copper coil producing an mmf of, say, 250 AT (Ampere Turns). The coil requires 10 Amperes with 5 Volts at room temperature. At a lower temperature the resistance of the copper coil decreases and 250 AT is achieved with 10A and 4V. Even lower temperature; 250 AT, 10A with 3V and so on until absolute zero where 250 AT is achieved with 10A and no applied voltage. Obviously 0K isn't going to happen, but the voltage independence of the magnetic field illustrated. Also the fact that mmf need not consume power with the undesirable heat byproduct hence the use of superconducting coils where extremely strong magnetic fields are required.

bi

By doing that example above you are bringing in a third parameter:Temperature, which also following the prior analogy is correct as well.

But how about if we raise the temperature instead of decreasing it like you did, with exactly same coil?

You started at Room Temp...so I will, to keep same "mid point"...but instead, we start raising it.
In your case resistance will decrease at lower temperatures, and resistance is directly proportional to voltage (or "linear")...meaning, the more we decrease resistance due to temp decrease, the less voltage it would be required to produce same AT.

And so, the opposite will occur when we raise temp, resistance will raise....and so, Higher voltage would be required....or Higher Pressures.

For example in hydrodynamics...An automotive Air Conditioning Compressor (the pump) has two lines attached...one is the Out Flow while the other one is the return line, or In Flow...now which line do you think would require to be thicker and which one finer?

The Out Flow line needs to be thicker...the In Flow or return line would be thinner. Now which one operates at higher pressures?

Now, on this example we are using a Refrigerant Fluid which works opposite to other fluids related to temperature, it expands at lower temperatures into gaseous form as it liquefies at higher temp. with the particular property that when it is in gaseous form it absorbs heat...while the opposite takes place when it becomes liquid...it releases heat.

Now after all the explanation above on refrigerant fluids properties...I will ask again, which line would operate at higher pressures?

Or could we say at "Higher Voltage" getting back to electricity...

Voltage is the resultant from Hi-Lo Pressures between two ends of a line or conductor...it is the same as High Pressure and Low Pressure in a Hydrodynamic Pump lines or "circuit".


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Ampere's Law

...

Exactly, each coil, depending on its spec's will require a given V and so an amperage.
...

But the mmf is only dependent on the current; that is the the total current passing through the area surrounded by the flux (magnetic field). Coil voltage is factor with the coil current, but not with the magnetic field. Many different voltage levels with many different coils can produce the same mmf (AT) to yield the given magnetic field.

Simply said: The field doesn't care about voltage.

Understand Ampere's Law and you will see.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

The Loop Hole...

But the mmf is only dependent on the current;

Bistander,

What you wrote above is exactly like saying:

"But the Voltage is only dependent on the Current"

MMF=EMF=V

And of course both are dependent upon each others!!

You are just falling into a loop hole by isolating (non relating) mmf and voltage...while they both are exactly the same thing...only within different scenarios and another color dress.

If you look at the equation to obtain mmf given by F:

F= Flux Times Resistance

or same as in Ohms Law:

V= I times R

Simply said: The field doesn't care about voltage.

Regards,

bi

Right, Field does not care ("here anymore") about Voltage...it ("now") cares about mmf...where mmf resumes to be voltage...

It is so easy to trick and confuse people by using so many different wordings, complicating simple analogies...which in the end...means exactly the same thing.

I highly recommend you study Hopkinson's Law...Parallel to Ohms Law.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

Ufo,

In an hidraulic analogy voltage is pressure in a pipe and current is the flow of water.

If you want to irrigate your garden you will just care about the flow of water (current), while the pressure (voltage) is just the driving force to enable the water to flow at that speed. You will need more or less pressure depending on the friction in your hose (impedance) which is defined by the length and thickness of the hose (analogy to a wire)

I will be sure that your plants in the garden does not care of the pressure you used. They will just care of the final flow of water.

And water never dissipate along the hose no matter if you have more or less resistance to flow.

Hope to be helpful.

[bistander]

mmf vs emf

...
MMF=EMF=V
...

Ufo,

That is incorrect. MMF is magnetomotive force in units of Ampere turns. EMF is electromotive force in units of Volts. MMF is not equal to EMF. There is often made an anology between the two to illustrate the magnetic circuit. But never is it said that MMF = EMF.

...
If you look at the equation to obtain mmf given by F:

F= Flux Times Resistance

or same as in Ohms Law:

V= I times R
...

F= Flux Times Reluctance, not Resistance.

Here again, it is just an analogy. The magnetic parameters are NOT the same as the electric parameters. Like often a hydraulic circuit is shown analogous to an electric circuit. Amperes are not the same thing literally as gallons per minute.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

In an hidraulic analogy voltage is pressure in a pipe and current is the flow of water.

Hanon,

There are conceptual errors in your analogy with hydraulics...

Voltage is Pressure, correct...but Current is NOT the flow of water...Current is the Force based on Density, Concentration of water within the Pipe.

Flow is the Result obtained when Both are effected, Pressure and Quantity.


If you have that same hose...but only a drop of water on it (like 0.005 amps)...and effect 500 psi (500 Volts)...no such big, robust flow will take place...actually none.

As if the hose would be full of water...but you only apply 0.002 psi...water will not even move...result: no flow.

Flow is Electrical Movement of charges.

Plus let me add this...Voltage is not just simply "pressure"...but to be a pressure "flow" there must be a low side and a high side of pressures...and by the Physics of mechanical movement...High pressures always flow towards lower pressures ends.


Hope it helps you too...


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

That is incorrect. MMF is magnetomotive force in units of Ampere turns. EMF is electromotive force in units of Volts. MMF is not equal to EMF. There is often made an anology between the two to illustrate the magnetic circuit. But never is it said that MMF = EMF.

Bistander,


How can we work with the same parameter, just by "vesting" it with another name?

The parameter Amperes/Turns is confusing within any analogy...by not relating to voltage.

What is the electrical analogy for Flux?...Current right?...and so Current is given by what?...Amperes right?

So now, we have also Amps Turns plus Flux which is also Current, and so amperage...concluding all we have here is amperage?


then voltage is taken out of the picture here?

The Analogy for mmf is emf...emf refers to Voltage...but mmf does not relates to another name...but to amps turns?

Flux analogy goes to currents...then to amperage...


Result: we have Amp Turns...plus Amps Flux?

F= Flux Times Reluctance, not Resistance.

Right, I confused terms...my bad.

Here again, it is just an analogy. The magnetic parameters are NOT the same as the electric parameters. Like often a hydraulic circuit is shown analogous to an electric circuit. Amperes are not the same thing literally as gallons per minute.

bi

I know that...but an Analogy is always invoked as to bring light into a subject of education...not the other way around...which is the way I am seeing you are trying to explain amps with amps lacking one parameter which does exist in the comparing analogy with Electrical Circuits...and so, now, all the sudden it is no longer represented in this "new analogy" with magnetic Circuits?


Do I am making myself clear here with my point of view?


Let me ask you then...where in this world is the representation of voltage in the Magnetic Circuit Analogy...did it just vanished in Counterspace?

It must be "somewhere" right?...or it mysteriously "trasvested" into AT with a parameter name which simply is not Voltage?

What about it if we decide to call them Volt/Turns?...Oh, can not do that!!...just because it was the French Ampere's last name who started presenting it and not Voltaire...Uh?

Unbelievable...and a great reason why we have not evolved passed the farting machines.


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Faraday's law

...
Let me ask you then...where in this world is the representation of voltage in the Magnetic Circuit Analogy...did it just vanished in Counterspace?
...

EMF = -N * dΦ/dt, where dΦ/dt is the change in flux with respect to time.

aka: Faraday's Law

Now the analogy between magnetic circuit and electric circuit is MMF to EMF, but the two are different and not dependent on each other directly.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

EMF = -N * dΦ/dt, where dΦ/dt is the change in flux with respect to time.

aka: Faraday's Law

Now the analogy between magnetic circuit and electric circuit is MMF to EMF, but the two are different and not dependent on each other directly.

bi

Bistander,

I asked you where is the Analogy of Voltage Parameter representation in the Magnetic Circuit?...not in Induction Law.

Obviously you can not answer directly that simple question.

However, in Ohm'ss Law we have:

V, I, R...simple

And in Hopkinson's Law we have:

F, Φ, R (Reluctance)

But we can not say...it is kind of "forbidden" that F=V but to AT?


Ufopolitics