mhardy6647
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 11,216
- Likes
- 24,178
You, sir, are my hero.If anyone wants to calculate the inductance, don't forget to consider the effect of the iron core.
You, sir, are my hero.If anyone wants to calculate the inductance, don't forget to consider the effect of the iron core.
Yes, there is, 'field theory', taught 2nd or 3rd year of BSEE curriculum.Incredible stuff.
I wonder if there might be a totally different way of understanding this - are we seeing the whole picture? I am going to have more beer and will get back to you on that one. Don't hold your breath!
If I understood correctly this gentleman (in the videos) is indeed introducing his audience to field theory. For those of us familiar to ohms law this looks incredible, I was (am) aware of some of the equations he refers to -- but I have never seen it explained the way he does, but I am no EE for sure.Yes, there is, 'field theory', taught 2nd or 3rd year of BSEE curriculum.
And discovered 100-200 years ago.
Maxwell, et al
it is hyperbole and misleading clickbait, lolIf I understood correctly this gentleman (in the videos) is indeed introducing his audience to field theory. For those of us familiar to ohms law this looks incredible, I was (am) aware of some of the equations he refers to -- but I have never seen it explained the way he does, but I am no EE for sure.
That explains it - this is why I found it so interesting!it is hyperbole and misleading clickbait, lol
Great follow-up.A follow-up:
Nuclei would have been simply wrong. He says "lattice elements", which (I guess) represent the atoms with all their non-free, or non-bloch, electrons.bouncing off nuclei
That was without doubt their intent.Those videos confuse the issue imo and lead to a misunderstanding of the concepts.
LolThat was without doubt their intent.
So you think you know better than a Phd EE that works at LIGO? Talk abou Dunnig Krugger. If you actually studied EM fields you need to relearn it.Context
ACSR Al conductor steel reinforced used for OH power transmission. Sizes are named after birds. Lol
Steel core wrapped with Al
Assume 'scoter', OD 1", steel 0.44"
Equations for magnetic field strength B
I = current = 640 (80% of rated)
u = relative permeability to uo air
r = radius of calculation
R = radius of conductor (or portion of)
uo = u Al = 1.000022, I'll use 1
u electrical steel 4000
Within conductor B = u I r / (2 Pi R^2)
Outside of conductor B = uo I / (2 Pi r^2)
Within the steel core
= 4000 x 640 x 0.22 / 2 Pi 0.22^ 2)
= 1,851,928 or 1.85e6
Within the aluminum = B at 0.5 - B at 0.22
= 114
Outside of conductor, 10% of radius or 0.55" or 0.05" from surface, <1/16"
1 640 0.55 / (2 Pi 0.55^2)
= 185
Total 1.85e6 + 114 + 185
1,852,282
In steel 99.98%
Out side of conductor ~ 0.01%
Is it reasonable to say the energy flows in the wire? Or at least 99.98% of it in the crude example.
View attachment 203685
Wow you really don't know field theory. A perfect conductor has no E field inside, and as the resistance goes up the field in the conductor rises but it stays small and near the surface. Try checking your "facts", the truth is easy to find.Context
From my post above we see >99% of the magnetic field B exists within the conductor. And the primary variable is I current. The same derivation can be done for E the electric field and the variable will be V, voltage or potential.
B ~ I
E ~ V
P = V I
S = 1/u E x B (S~rate of energy xfer~Power)
Equivalency if fields constrained to conductor.
If the geometry is captured by other means, ie R = p Length / Area and the permeabilities replaced by physical parameters L (B associated, magnetic) and C (E associated, electric) the computations become simpler.
In addition, measuring and controlling V and I are simpler. How do you interrupt B? By opening a switch and stopping I,
The are mutually inclusive in the transfer of P or S.
Those videos confuse the issue imo and lead to a misunderstanding of the concepts. I creates the field, the field can create I. A xfmr or motor. V or E initiates the generation of I/B in the case under study.
The model is contrived.
Infinite length in essence.
No R
But we have C
C in // adds, so it will approach infinity
X the impedance to AC ~ 1/(2 Pi f C)
Since C >>> 2 Pi ~ 1/(f C)
If DC , f = 0 and as f approaches 0, and C constant, X approaches infinity.
No DC current flows, lol, we know this.
But as C approaches infinity it negates f inversely approaching 0 ~ 1/infinity, the result is some value, so current may flow.
If the V is AC, then as C goes to infinity X approaches 0 and you get a short circuit ie, no impedance.
The way he shows the fields leaping from source to load are ridiculous. As we know >99% of the fields are are constrained within the conductor.
Junk science for YouTube $.
This reference is a bit weak, don't you think? It talks about a conducting material inside an electrical field, it's a well known electrostatic's result, but not exactly the same situation. Where is the equation that depicts how E distributes differently inside the conductor depending on its conductivity? I was expecting that given your previous assertion. Not saying either of you is right or wrong, just that your reference does no explain the situation at hand IMHO.