From: Jeroen Belleman on
harry wrote:
>
>
> Unfortunately the relationship between ampere turns and the magnetic
> flux generated is not linear. Ie doubling ampere turns does not
> double the flux. Also, at some point, the magnetic material
> "saturates" and you can add as many ampere turns as you like but flux
> will not increase.

You may try to sell that argument to our magnet builders here
at CERN. ;-) How do you think they get to 10 Teslas?

Jeroen Belleman
From: pom on
Jeroen Belleman a écrit :
> harry wrote:
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately the relationship between ampere turns and the magnetic
>> flux generated is not linear. Ie doubling ampere turns does not
>> double the flux. Also, at some point, the magnetic material
>> "saturates" and you can add as many ampere turns as you like but flux
>> will not increase.
>
> You may try to sell that argument to our magnet builders here
> at CERN. ;-) How do you think they get to 10 Teslas?
>
> Jeroen Belleman
Hi!
well, exactly by NOT using ferromagnetic core materials.
POM
From: Jeroen Belleman on
pom wrote:
> Jeroen Belleman a �crit :
>> harry wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately the relationship between ampere turns and the magnetic
>>> flux generated is not linear. Ie doubling ampere turns does not
>>> double the flux. Also, at some point, the magnetic material
>>> "saturates" and you can add as many ampere turns as you like but flux
>>> will not increase.
>>
>> You may try to sell that argument to our magnet builders here
>> at CERN. ;-) How do you think they get to 10 Teslas?
>>
>> Jeroen Belleman
> Hi!
> well, exactly by NOT using ferromagnetic core materials.
> POM

Are you suggesting that the presence of ferromagnetic core materials
*prevents* you from going there?

Jeroen Belleman
From: JosephKK on
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 07:33:55 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 06:58:16 -0700,
>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 11:26:47 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 11:12:36 -0700, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>>>MURDERERS" <xeton2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
<snip>
>>>
>>>You really don't understand magnetics or engineering units, do you?
>>>
>>>The mag field through an electromagnet of constant reluctance is
>>>proportional to the number of ampere-turns pumped into the coil.
>>>
>>>Double the amps for fixed turns, get twice the field.
>>>
>>>Double the turns for fixed amps, ditto.
>>>
>>>The engineering unit here is ampere-turns, formally (amps * turns) and
>>>NOT amps/turn.
>>>
>>>Try working out some numerical examples and see if any light dawns.
>>>But don't neglect your English homework.
>>>
>>>John
>>>
>>
>>Please do not assign drunk driver's errors to JF who has tried to
>>correct them. Click, click, you are down two notches in my estimate
>>of you JL.
>
>1. I have no idea what you're talking about
>
>and
>
>2. I don't give a FF about your notches or your estimates.
>
>John

It was a quite direct reply to your immediately preceding post. Too
bad you cannot read very well. Not that i expect you to give a damn
about anything except how many sycophants you can gather around
yourself.
From: Jan Panteltje on
On a sunny day (Thu, 08 Oct 2009 08:46:48 +0200) it happened Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen(a)nospam.please> wrote in <hak1s3$kue$1(a)aioe.org>:

>harry wrote:
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately the relationship between ampere turns and the magnetic
>> flux generated is not linear. Ie doubling ampere turns does not
>> double the flux. Also, at some point, the magnetic material
>> "saturates" and you can add as many ampere turns as you like but flux
>> will not increase.
>
>You may try to sell that argument to our magnet builders here
>at CERN. ;-) How do you think they get to 10 Teslas?

They dont, it blew up.