Posted by Michael B on January 9, 2010, 4:45 am
Preparing to wind a motor coil or more. Need some info to consider a
shortcut. Putting aside the issue of current handling capacity, does
anyone have awareness of whether a multistrand wire made of smaller
magnet wires can serve instead of a single wire with the same number
of windings?
> ---
> Please...
> Holding down a scroll key to get to the beginning of a top-posted series
> of articles is at least 50% less efficacious than having the oldest
> article on top since once you've read the stack and gotten to the bottom
> you can type your article there instead of having to scroll back to the
> top to do it.
> You're right about one thing though, and that's that groups which orient
> themselves as if they were email and either pretend or are stupid enough
> to think that everyone knows what went before should probably stick to
> the email format instead of burdening themselves with learning how to
> post properly.
> Even Google Groups, that bastion for the clueless states, from:
> http://groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=12348&topic=250
> "Summarize what you're following up.
> When you click "Reply" under "show options" to follow up an existing
> article, Google Groups includes the full article in quotes, with the
> cursor at the top of the article. Tempting though it is to just start
> typing your message, please STOP and do two things first.
> Look at the quoted text and remove parts that are irrelevant.
> Then, go to the BOTTOM of the article and start typing there.
> Doing this makes it much easier for your readers to get through your
> post. They'll have a reminder of the relevant text before your
> comment, but won't have to re-read the entire article.
> And if your reply appears on a site before the original article does,
> they'll get the gist of what you're talking about."
> So, you see, even though you pretend to fight valiantly, tooth and nail,
> to defend your untenable position, in truth you're reduced yourself to
> nothing more than a laughingstock low-grade troll since even the lowest
> common denominator is apprised of proper usenetiquette, which you choose
> to flaunt for the sole purpose of attracting unwarranted attention by
> tilting at windmills and fomenting trouble.
> ---
> >Hmm, now that I think of it, there is an
> >enormous number of specific-interest
> >groups, more being formed all the time.
> >That would suggest top posting being
> >more appropriate,
> ---
> As well as being a red herring, that statement is false since bottom and
> in-line posting, when appropriate, is the posting style of choice for
> anyone who reads from left to right and from top to bottom.
> Just think about how you're reading this sentence; are you starting from
> the eroteme and reading back back?
> I don't think so, ergo: "as above, so below".
> ---
> >along with ignoring
> >self-appointed net-cops that want to try
> >to force a practice they know to be
> >archaic and clumsy.
> ---
> I'd say that applied more to you than to me since I'm merely defending
> Google Groups' sage advice while (unless you're trying to troll, which
> is more likely) you're trying to tear down a practice which serves
> USENET in good stead and replace it with an onerous non-solution to a
> non-problem.
> Key phrase here is: "Don't fix it if it ain't broke." while what you
> seem to be saying is: "If it works, break it so I can have my way."
> Amazing what you creeps try to get away with, yes?
> JF
Posted by Josepi on January 13, 2010, 5:14 pm
Well done!
Do you have a lot of this multi-strand wire to use for a cheap price?
I think it would make the winding too complicated. Instead of many turns you
will have days of soldering connections to get all the strands in series.
That's a huge lump you may not have room for.
Preparing to wind a motor coil or more. Need some info to consider a
shortcut. Putting aside the issue of current handling capacity, does
anyone have awareness of whether a multistrand wire made of smaller
magnet wires can serve instead of a single wire with the same number
of windings?
> ---
< trolling snipped>
> ---
< trolling snipped>
> ---
< trolling snipped>
> ---
< insulting snipped>
---
<temper tantrum snipped>
> JF
Posted by John Fields on January 13, 2010, 6:40 pm
>Well done!
>Do you have a lot of this multi-strand wire to use for a cheap price?
>I think it would make the winding too complicated. Instead of many turns you
>will have days of soldering connections to get all the strands in series.
>That's a huge lump you may not have room for.
---
LOL, I see that lump on your shoulders relates you directly to
Camelus dromedarius.
JF
Posted by Michael B on January 14, 2010, 1:42 am
No.
The field strength is related to the number of coils.
So if I start out and go around the coil form 2,000
times with one wire, could I get the same effect by
using a multistrand, with each strand insulated
from the adjacent one? If I were to use a 10 strand
and only go around the coil form 200 times, would
it have the same effect?
Litz wire would not have much current capacity, but
would it have the same instantaneous magnetic field
from a capacitive discharge?
It's not a question of multiple solder joints along the way,
it would be a beginning, and an end, with wires soldered
together at those points only.
> Well done!
> Do you have a lot of this multi-strand wire to use for a cheap price?
> I think it would make the winding too complicated. Instead of many turns you
> will have days of soldering connections to get all the strands in series.
> That's a huge lump you may not have room for.
Posted by John Fields on January 14, 2010, 12:31 pm
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:42:23 -0800 (PST), Michael B
>No.
>The field strength is related to the number of coils.
>So if I start out and go around the coil form 2,000
>times with one wire, could I get the same effect by
>using a multistrand, with each strand insulated
>from the adjacent one?
---
Well, finally, something that makes sense! :-)
Yes.
---
>If I were to use a 10 strand
>and only go around the coil form 200 times, would
>it have the same effect?
---
No.
---
>Litz wire would not have much current capacity,
---
Litz wire is simply insulated wire stranded in a peculiar way in order
to reduce skin effect, and can have any current capacity required for
the application at hand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litz_wire
>but would it have the same instantaneous magnetic field
>from a capacitive discharge?
For the initial spike:
Version 4
SHEET 1 880 680
WIRE 64 0 0 0
WIRE 224 0 128 0
WIRE 224 32 224 0
WIRE 0 128 0 0
WIRE 224 160 224 112
WIRE 0 288 0 208
WIRE 224 288 224 240
WIRE 224 288 0 288
WIRE 0 368 0 288
FLAG 0 368 0
SYMBOL ind 208 144 R0
SYMATTR InstName L1
SYMATTR Value 1e-3
SYMBOL res 208 16 R0
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 1000
SYMBOL cap 128 -16 R90
WINDOW 0 0 32 VBottom 0
WINDOW 3 32 32 VTop 0
SYMATTR InstName C1
SYMATTR Value 1e-9
SYMBOL voltage 0 112 R0
WINDOW 3 24 104 Invisible 0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value PULSE(0 10 0 1e-9)
TEXT -34 392 Left 0 !.tran 1e-3
---
>It's not a question of multiple solder joints along the way,
>it would be a beginning, and an end, with wires soldered
>together at those points only.
---
If you use stranded wire to make a coil with all of the strands soldered
together at the ends but insulated from each other at every other point,
then the resistance of each strand will be the end-to-end resistance of
the wire multiplied by the number of strands in the wire, and the
current in each strand will be:
1
Is = ----
It
where Is is the current in any strand and It is the total current in the
wire.
Since the strands are in parallel, the total resistance of the wire will
be:
1
Rt = ------
Rs n
where Rt is the total resistance of the wire,
Rs is the resistance of a single strand, and
n is the number of strands in the wire.
Graphically, (View in Courier) for a raw 1000' length of seven strand
enameled #10 AWG wire we have:
|<----------1000 feet------------>|
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
|<------------7 ohms------------->|
---------------------------------
while with the ends soldered together,:
|<-----------1000 feet---------->|
|<-------------1 ohm------------>|
| |
+--------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------------+
Now, since I've answered your question courteously, would you extend me
the courtesy of bottom posting a reply, please?
JF
XML site map
> Please...
> Holding down a scroll key to get to the beginning of a top-posted series
> of articles is at least 50% less efficacious than having the oldest
> article on top since once you've read the stack and gotten to the bottom
> you can type your article there instead of having to scroll back to the
> top to do it.
> You're right about one thing though, and that's that groups which orient
> themselves as if they were email and either pretend or are stupid enough
> to think that everyone knows what went before should probably stick to
> the email format instead of burdening themselves with learning how to
> post properly.
> Even Google Groups, that bastion for the clueless states, from:
> http://groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=12348&topic=250
> "Summarize what you're following up.
> When you click "Reply" under "show options" to follow up an existing
> article, Google Groups includes the full article in quotes, with the
> cursor at the top of the article. Tempting though it is to just start
> typing your message, please STOP and do two things first.
> Look at the quoted text and remove parts that are irrelevant.
> Then, go to the BOTTOM of the article and start typing there.
> Doing this makes it much easier for your readers to get through your
> post. They'll have a reminder of the relevant text before your
> comment, but won't have to re-read the entire article.
> And if your reply appears on a site before the original article does,
> they'll get the gist of what you're talking about."
> So, you see, even though you pretend to fight valiantly, tooth and nail,
> to defend your untenable position, in truth you're reduced yourself to
> nothing more than a laughingstock low-grade troll since even the lowest
> common denominator is apprised of proper usenetiquette, which you choose
> to flaunt for the sole purpose of attracting unwarranted attention by
> tilting at windmills and fomenting trouble.
> ---
> >Hmm, now that I think of it, there is an
> >enormous number of specific-interest
> >groups, more being formed all the time.
> >That would suggest top posting being
> >more appropriate,
> ---
> As well as being a red herring, that statement is false since bottom and
> in-line posting, when appropriate, is the posting style of choice for
> anyone who reads from left to right and from top to bottom.
> Just think about how you're reading this sentence; are you starting from
> the eroteme and reading back back?
> I don't think so, ergo: "as above, so below".
> ---
> >along with ignoring
> >self-appointed net-cops that want to try
> >to force a practice they know to be
> >archaic and clumsy.
> ---
> I'd say that applied more to you than to me since I'm merely defending
> Google Groups' sage advice while (unless you're trying to troll, which
> is more likely) you're trying to tear down a practice which serves
> USENET in good stead and replace it with an onerous non-solution to a
> non-problem.
> Key phrase here is: "Don't fix it if it ain't broke." while what you
> seem to be saying is: "If it works, break it so I can have my way."
> Amazing what you creeps try to get away with, yes?
> JF