Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [axialflux] Re: Magnet Distance

Expand Messages
  • Henry Davis
    That s kind of what I assumed, the same as how light works. The difference that has me unsure is that with light you have to get very far away for it not to
    Message 1 of 17 , Dec 23, 2012
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      That's kind of what I assumed, the same as how light works. The
      difference that has me unsure is that with light you have to get very
      far away for it not to be seen at all but with a magnet you don't have
      to get very far away at all for its effect to be very near zero.

      If I get some extra time I going to experiment with the distance thing.

      Henry


      On Dec 22, 2012, at 10:46 AM, magn0mite wrote:

      > Hi All
      >
      > If I am not mistaken, the inverse square law applies. If you double
      > the distance apart, you halve the force.
      > If you clamp a magnet to the table and aproach it with a like pole
      > of a similar magnet you will feel when the forces begin to take
      > effect.
      >
      > magn0mite
      >
      > --- In axialflux@yahoogroups.com, Henry Davis wrote:
      > >
      > > Without going into too many specifics, is there an estimated (a
      > rough
      > > percentage) for loss as the distance from magnet to coil increases?
      > > It must vary with materials but I'm just curious about the typical
      > > magnets and coils used for the homebuilt Hugh P type axial.
      > >
      > > In other words, what's the largest gap where it first begins to
      > produce?
      > >
      > > Henry
      >
    • magn0mite
      Hi Charlie, all Thanks for the correction. Quartering the force should also feel much more comortable for Henry. It soon tails off to virtually nothing. Light
      Message 2 of 17 , Dec 24, 2012
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Charlie, all

        Thanks for the correction. Quartering the force should also feel much more comortable for Henry.  It soon tails off to virtually nothing.
        Light is peculiar and doesn't use the inverse square law. Gravity is the best analagy.

        magn0mite

        --- In axialflux@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie" wrote:
        >
        > magn0mite - you are correct, the inverse square law does apply. Which means, theoretically, if you double the distance, you QUARTER the resulting power.
        >
        > Charlie
        >
        > --- In axialflux@yahoogroups.com, "magn0mite" richard2contact@ wrote:
        > >
        > > Hi All
        > >
        > > If I am not mistaken, the inverse square law applies. If you double the
        > > distance apart, you halve the force.
        > > If you clamp a magnet to the table and aproach it with a like pole of a
        > > similar magnet you will feel when the forces begin to take effect.
        > >
        > > magn0mite
        > >
        > > --- In axialflux@yahoogroups.com, Henry Davis wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Without going into too many specifics, is there an estimated (a rough
        > > > percentage) for loss as the distance from magnet to coil increases?
        > > > It must vary with materials but I'm just curious about the typical
        > > > magnets and coils used for the homebuilt Hugh P type axial.
        > > >
        > > > In other words, what's the largest gap where it first begins to
        > > produce?
        > > >
        > > > Henry
        > > >
        > >
        >
      • g.gibbes
        Hi All, I m a new member here, glad to join the group. Just thought I could help with this question. The magnetic flux across the air gap depends on the
        Message 3 of 17 , Jan 14, 2013
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi All,

          I'm a new member here, glad to join the group. Just thought I could help with this question.

          The magnetic flux across the air gap depends on the reluctance of the complete magnetic circuit.

          the formula is:
          flux = MMF / circuit_reluctance

          MMF is fixed according to the magnet grade and thickness. The circuit reluctance depends mainly on how far the magnetic flux has to travel through low permeability material (air, copper and magnet). Interestingly, the permeability of a Neodymium permanent magnet is similar to air.

          So the relationship would be flux = k/g
          where "k" is a constant and "g" is the total gap between the iron rotor plates. (not the gap between the magnets).

          So for instance, if the magnet on each side is 10mm thick, and the gap between the magnets is initially 10mm, then the total "air" gap is 30mm. If you increase the gap between the magents to 20mm, then the total "air" gap becomes 40mm. The amount of magnetic flux in the this new configuration will be about 30/40 = 75% compared to the initial case.

          Therefore the induced voltage (at any given RPM) will be about 75%. (assuming you don't change the number of turns in the stator)

          hope this helps,
          Greg


          --- In axialflux@yahoogroups.com, Henry Davis wrote:
          >
          > That's kind of what I assumed, the same as how light works. The
          > difference that has me unsure is that with light you have to get very
          > far away for it not to be seen at all but with a magnet you don't have
          > to get very far away at all for its effect to be very near zero.
          >
          > If I get some extra time I going to experiment with the distance thing.
          >
          > Henry
          >
          >
          > On Dec 22, 2012, at 10:46 AM, magn0mite wrote:
          >
          > > Hi All
          > >
          > > If I am not mistaken, the inverse square law applies. If you double
          > > the distance apart, you halve the force.
          > > If you clamp a magnet to the table and aproach it with a like pole
          > > of a similar magnet you will feel when the forces begin to take
          > > effect.
          > >
          > > magn0mite
          > >
          > > --- In axialflux@yahoogroups.com, Henry Davis wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Without going into too many specifics, is there an estimated (a
          > > rough
          > > > percentage) for loss as the distance from magnet to coil increases?
          > > > It must vary with materials but I'm just curious about the typical
          > > > magnets and coils used for the homebuilt Hugh P type axial.
          > > >
          > > > In other words, what's the largest gap where it first begins to
          > > produce?
          > > >
          > > > Henry
          > >
          >
        • Henry Davis
          Thank you for that Greg. Henry On Jan 14, 2013, at 9:28 AM, g.gibbes wrote:
          Message 4 of 17 , Jan 14, 2013
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Thank you for that Greg.

            Henry


            On Jan 14, 2013, at 9:28 AM, g.gibbes wrote:
            <Snip>

             



            Hi All,

            I'm a new member here, glad to join the group. Just thought I could help with this question.

            The magnetic flux across the air gap depends on the reluctance of the complete magnetic circuit.

            the formula is:
            flux = MMF / circuit_reluctance

            MMF is fixed according to the magnet grade and thickness. The circuit reluctance depends mainly on how far the magnetic flux has to travel through low permeability material (air, copper and magnet). Interestingly, the permeability of a Neodymium permanent magnet is similar to air.

            So the relationship would be flux = k/g
            where "k" is a constant and "g" is the total gap between the iron rotor plates. (not the gap between the magnets).

            So for instance, if the magnet on each side is 10mm thick, and the gap between the magnets is initially 10mm, then the total "air" gap is 30mm. If you increase the gap between the magents to 20mm, then the total "air" gap becomes 40mm. The amount of magnetic flux in the this new configuration will be about 30/40 = 75% compared to the initial case.

            Therefore the induced voltage (at any given RPM) will be about 75%. (assuming you don't change the number of turns in the stator)

            hope this helps,
            Greg


          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.