Electromagnetic Induction Without Air Core

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of electromagnetic induction, specifically exploring the effectiveness of tightly wound wire coils without an air core compared to traditional ferromagnetic or air core designs. Participants examine the relationship between the number of turns in a coil, the area enclosed, and the induced electromotive force (EMF) generated.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the rationale behind using air or ferromagnetic cores, suggesting that tighter winding of wire could increase the number of turns and thus the induced EMF.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of the area enclosed by the coil, arguing that reducing the area while increasing the number of turns may not yield the desired increase in EMF.
  • Another participant provides a mathematical example to illustrate the calculation of induced EMF, highlighting the relationship between the number of loops, area, and magnetic flux.
  • There is a discussion about whether the relevant area for calculations should be the area of the air core or the cross-sectional area of the coil itself.
  • Some participants suggest that the effectiveness of the coil design should be evaluated through calculations or simulations, indicating uncertainty about the optimal configuration.
  • One participant points out that while increasing the number of turns may seem beneficial, it could lead to a decrease in the magnetic flux encircled by the coil, potentially negating any advantages.
  • There is a correction regarding the area calculation for a square loop made from a fixed length of wire, with participants clarifying the relationship between wire length and area.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness of tightly wound coils without air cores versus traditional designs. There is no consensus on the optimal approach, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best configuration for maximizing induced EMF.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their discussions, including assumptions about magnetic flux and the dependence on specific configurations of coils. The mathematical steps and relationships discussed are not fully resolved, leaving room for further exploration.

billmanhillma
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Scientifically, it doesn't make sense why you can't just wind up wire without really much air in the middle. In order to get more wire closer to the magnetic flux, why wouldn't you just wind up the coil tighter? I keep seeing ferromagnetic or air cores. Why not a tightly would wire so more windings can be achieved?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
What are you trying to achieve? Or what do you think you can achieve?
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to achieve more EMF(voltage) per coil. According to the equation:
EMF = -N((delta B * delta A)/delta T)

My goal is to play with each part of the equation with real world prototypes. I'm starting with 'N' as it pertains to my original question.
 
billmanhillma said:
I'm trying to achieve more EMF(voltage) per coil. According to the equation:
EMF = -N((delta B * delta A)/delta T)

My goal is to play with each part of the equation with real world prototypes. I'm starting with 'N' as it pertains to my original question.

[tex]EMF=-N \frac {\partial \Phi}{\partial t}=-N\frac{\partial (AB)}{\partial t}=-NA\frac{\partial B}{\partial t}, \;\hbox { where A is cross section area of the coil and B is scalar magnetic field density.}[/tex]

If you wind so tight and there is no area, A=0. Where does that get you?

In English, the induced EMF across the two terminals of the coil is equal to the magnetic field density B through the area enclosed inside the coil. The bigger the area A, the larger the induced EMF! You are going the opposite direction.
 
Last edited:
Your reply is puzzling to me.
Let's suppose you have 1 loop of wire where the length of that wire is 40 meters. Now, let's suppose we make that loop to be a perfect square. The area of that loop if 20 meters2. Now let's suppose the magnetic flux going through that area is .2T which passes the loop in .5 seconds. The induced EMF that I get is:
A = (40/4)*2
-1(20*.2)/.5 = -8 volts

If however I take the same 40 meters of wire and create 200 loops where there's virtually no air gap (granted the magnetic flux is an average through the coil because it thicker), it's a smaller area, it's just multiplied by a factor of N. The length of the wire is the exact same. I think the point is to get as much magnetic flux through the coil.

If I want to convert the coil into a single square loop, than the area of that loop will always be L/2 where L is the length of wire.

Am I thinking about the wrong area? Is it the area of the air core? or the cross sectional area of the coil?
 
Last edited:
You mean you have a fixed length of wire and you can wind one turn with big area in the middle or many turns with smaller area in the middle? That was not clear in your original question.

For that, you calculate the EMF in each case and see. Maybe you can write a little excel program to find out whether there is a peak EMF at certain area vs turns and all. You don't need to ask here. I don't have an answer and it is not apparent one way or the other.
 
EMF = -N((delta B * delta A)/delta T)

bill

it's not the proximity to the flux that counts
but the amount of it you have fenced in with your coil.

Remember B is flux per unit area
so if you halve the diameter of your coil, indeed you get twice as many turns out of the same amount of wire
but they only encircle a quarter as much flux
so you lost ground.
 
If I want to convert the coil into a single square loop, than the area of that loop will always be L/2 where L is the length of wire.

say what?

##L## feet of wire around four fenceposts makes a square with each side ##L/4## feet
which would be area ##L^2/16## square feet not L/2.

Takes a mile of fence for forty acres
but only four miles for six hundred & forty.
 
jim hardy said:
bill

Remember B is flux per unit area
so if you halve the diameter of your coil, indeed you get twice as many turns out of the same amount of wire
but they only encircle a quarter as much flux
so you lost ground.
You got it.
That's the bottom line, Jim.
No more need be said!
(But I'm sure it will. :rolleyes:)
 

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
76
Views
11K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K