Coils - Optimizing Turns vs. Current

Den onsdag den 12. november 2014 18.14.56 UTC+1 skrev DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno:

the field is never static, modern ignition coils are at most a few ohm, dwell times are in milliseconds

or the energy is dumped in the driver, at ~400V to protect the coil

Current through an inductor makes a field, changing the field or compensating for resistance in the inductor requires a voltage

-Lasse

Reply to
Lasse Langwadt Christensen
Loading thread data ...

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 09:06:24 -0800, Dog Bagfood Gave us:

Now the idiot thinks that a planetoid's gravitational force is a point source. Sure, it has a single point of focus, but the entire mass is REQUIRED to create that force field.

Somebody oughtta whopp you upside da haed with a Van Allen belt!

Bwuahahahahahahah! BRL! BRL!!

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 09:45:19 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen Gave us:

Learn to read, idiot. What part of POINT FIRED IGNITION do you not understand?

I know how the solid state waveform works, and do not need a primer. I wrote about hard switched fields.

Try again.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

I hope not. I can't afford to start paying the furniture for their work.

Reply to
Ralph Barone

Worm(s) or not, you have demonstrated a lack of knowledge of what the scien tific definition of work is, which is involved in one of the FIRST courses you would ever take in science of physics.

What have you to say about that ? Will you stand against the ACTUAL definit ion still ? Or will you change your position in the face of a WORLDFUL of p roof ?

Your call.

To amned here : Like the switch that simply transfers the power to a load, the hand is just that, IN THAT EQUATION. The "work" done by the human body to burn up that sugar or whatever in NOT IN THAT CIRCUIT, OR EQUATION. It i s irrelevant. In the scientific sense, no work is done.

If you cannot understand separating these principles, I do not know what th e f*ck to tell you.

Reply to
jurb6006

That is not included in the scientific equatuion, WHICH MEANS DEFINITION, of work.

How the f*ck hard can that be to understand ?

Reply to
jurb6006

So you never heard of forward convertor.

It CAN be done the other way, it ws just easier to use the "reverse" converter then.

They work a but differently not BTW. Don't try to fix cars.

Reply to
jurb6006

I have come to the conclusion that Nov 12 (32 minutes ago)DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno is a world reknown economist and is responsible for the state of the world economy, and if not, someone just like that is.

Betcha he has one of them thar eternal combustion or whatever machines. No fuel just runs ferever.

Reply to
jurb6006

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 21:18:45 -0800 (PST), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com Gave us:

Speak up, worm.

I did no such thing.

You must have never hiked. To gain kinetic energy against a spheroid's gravity, one performs work. Gaining altitude away from the center of said spheroid requires work be performed.

Look. Place a ball on the stand. Is work being done? NO.

Was work done to get it there from however many feet closer to the center of the Earth it was before it was placed onto the stand? Yes.

When it falls off the stand, work will be performed as it strikes the ground as well.

THAT is a HARD, mechanical stand.

The micro-adjustments a human makes to hold such an item stationary, however, is an entirely different animal. It is NOT "at rest". You and your claim that I am wrong are toast.

You dig, idiot?

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 21:18:45 -0800 (PST), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com Gave us:

I'd say that you are a goddamned idiot, because you place a space between your statement and your punctuation, to resolve some stupid, imagined unreadability.

If you can't even get that right, how am I supposed to place any credence in any of your pathetic "you don't know jack" cracks?

And you missed a couple of particulars if you ever took such a course.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 21:18:45 -0800 (PST), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com Gave us:

Awwww... isn't the boy a big man now? He cusses!

I know what to tell you. Go back to school.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

Showing such fundamental misunderstanding it's a good job DimBulb is a janitor and not let loose on anything to do with engineering.

Reply to
Pomegranate Bastard

You aren't aware of having demonstrated a gap in your education, but your d enial merely makes the gap a little more obvious.

It's not micro-adjustments. It takes energy to keep a muscle contracted and static, but that energy isn't being expended in any useful way, so it does n't get totted up as useful work. Not should it. If you had any sense, you' d use a stand to support the ball where ever it needed to be supported.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

Really you should give up on this already! It is *literally* childs level stuff (it was tought at about age 12 in the UK).

The first google result for "work":

--

John Devereux
Reply to
John Devereux

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 02:33:55 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman Gave us:

It is NOT "static" idiot.

If there is no stiff strut under the ball... if a person's flesh and balance upon one's feet is the "stand", it is, and I repeat IS an active mechanism, and NOT a hard stanchion.

So, YOU idiots need to look up the word STANCHION, because you are all assuming one where one is not in place.

I win.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

Now we know what it is like to play chess with a pidgeon.

Reply to
jurb6006

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 02:33:55 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman Gave us:

Your tally opinions are inconsequential to the facts.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:37:19 -0800 (PST), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com Gave us:

How many of you did the doc say that you were?

Does a pigeon perform work while balancing on a perch?

You might carry more credence if your pathetic cracks involved proper spelling.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

At a fixed frequency, like any linear device (inductor, capacitor, resistor or combination) the field is proportional to voltage. But, the relationship is to RMS average voltage

flux = field * area = constant *(1/ frequency) * voltage_RMS * sin(2*pi*frequency * t + phase)

for a pure inductor, the current relationship is

flux = field * area = constant2 * current

with no need to invoke averages; that's the instantaneous current proportional to the instantaneous flux.

Reply to
whit3rd

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.