Hi Mags, No argument here, so what are you meaning when you say a true rotating magnetic field, as far as I know a magnetic field does not rotate as in the faraday disk sense, I thought everyone concurs the field itself does not rotate but is stationary, the only way I know of to create a rotating magnetic field is to set it up, as in several coils, electronics etc. With a 2 phase rotating field using 4 coils it travels around like a bar magnet. Each cycle the field makes one complete revolution which is handy for speed, to increase rotation you just increase frequency and RPM goes up. Millions of RPM can be reached, but you probably know this already. So what do you mean when you say a true rotating magnetic field?
hey room.
what im thinking is, by an interpretation of 'rotating magnetic field' is just that. i agree with the need for individually driven windings and many in order to produce the desired effect, so, you already know what i mean.
say we have an armature from a standard dc motor. make it vertical axis and rotate the brushes instead. that would be a perfect example of a true rotating field. or as you say, drive the individual windings electronically. you should have a pretty nice, smooth looking rotating field around that stationary armature. so beyond that, how do we use that to get ou? like i said earlier, this top and bottom ring tpu example, if it worked, has the most clues of all. if it had a suggested rotating field, assuming that the only windings are the 4 on the bottom, that we can actually see, then the only way i see that is to drive the windings individually, sequentially, whether it be pulsed or ac driven in a manor that still only, as ac had said in the post from your thread, wouldnt be an actual rotating of the field but more of a shifting from here to there, but what happend between here and there is not the same as an actual rotation.
im not saying that my theory, of which IS yet unproven, is the answer. but it is fresh. only within the last week it has come to mind and is making more sense to me as i go. but, here is where unproven theories should be presented, tested and laid to rest once proven wrong, or upheld as fact once proven right. but its not just the man with the theory that has to prove his argument, it will take others to prove it wrong also in order to put it to rest.
as i said before, im not seeing the rotating field idea having any key to gains of any sort. my example of seeing gains in multiplying the number of speaker drivers using the same tot power input for each test and increasing 3db output for each doubling of drivers should have the hairs on the back of everyones neck arise. if sm was into audio, working with quadraphonic developements, its very possible he was on to that gain function. recovering that gain via sound wave energy can be tricky. as i said earlier, if sm had the wisdom to convert the gain function in solid state form, this could be it. im giving it a simple shot with what i have and see. if the top and bottom rings were iron, i can see the creative, intuitive thought of the circular bulges around the 4 squares, which i assume are rectangle cores, to make a better magnetic circuit between the cores and the rings. the 4 cores being wound with secondary receivers, pulsing the 4 ring windings in bucking config hits up both sides of the secondaries, adding up to the secondaries being driven by 2 drivers. 3db increase per say to the analogy of the speakers.
the turning the thing upside down and the possibility that the earths field affected it or gravity doesnt jive with me. id think that somebody over all these years with experiments would have encountered such effects. as strong as the earths field is, as i know it is, im not seeing that happening here with those fat few turn windings. dunno. my opinion. for now i stand on that.
mags
e
feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
Author
Topic: The TPU: Is it Real ? (Read 419163 times)
