Chip with simple program for Toy

On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:24:22 -0500, nospam@nevis.com wrote:

Josepi wrote:
No but the font you use does!


LOL




What the hell are you on about now? Nobody has a clue what you are
referring to.
---
Neither does he, he's just intent on being paid attention to by being
annoying.

JF
 
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:14:14 -0500, "Josepi" <JRM@invaliid.con> wrote:

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
 
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:34:53 -0600, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:24:22 -0500, nospam@nevis.com wrote:

Josepi wrote:
No but the font you use does!


LOL




What the hell are you on about now? Nobody has a clue what you are
referring to.

---
Neither does he, he's just intent on being paid attention to by being
annoying.
Just another Usenet vandal.
 
I guess that proves it then by your fine example. Thanx

Time to get rid of that cheap POS "newsreader" that use try to browse
Usenets posts with, apparently.

Get one that can thread and read the associated headers with the text and
try to keep any relevent text with your response. This will make it more
apparent what you are referring to next time.





nospam@nevis.com> wrote in message news:4b4e0f31$1@news.x-privat.org...
What the hell are you on about now? Nobody has a clue what you are
referring to.



Josepi wrote:
No but the font you use does!


LOL
 
Josepi wrote:
I guess that proves it then by your fine example. Thanx

Time to get rid of that cheap POS "newsreader" that use try to browse
Usenets posts with, apparently.

Get one that can thread and read the associated headers with the text and
try to keep any relevent text with your response. This will make it more
apparent what you are referring to next time.



I'm using a newsreader that does all that, you are the problem, not
anyone's newsreader. By top posting and misappropriating quotes
nobody has any idea who or what you are referring to.
 
He promised that he wouldn't waste any more of his
precious time on this, so I'm hoping that he's true to
his word.

On Jan 13, 12:07 pm, "Josepi" <J...@invaliid.con> wrote:
Well Michael?
Ignore the jerk. He won't convince anybody, especially thinking people, with
his contradictory tactics.
 
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.

On Jan 13, 12:14 pm, "Josepi" <J...@invaliid.con> wrote:
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.
 
John Fields Inscribed thus:

On Jan 12, 10:06 am, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:35:34 -0800 (PST), Michael B
baughfam@bellsouth.net> wrote:

it's not like we'd be any worse off without you.

You're right. You've done a good job of making things bad,
I doubt anyone could make it much worse.

---
Made things bad???

All I've done is point out to you that, on USENET, bottom posting is
preferable to top posting and that your incessant use of the evil top
posting method is frowned upon by most of USENET and even advised
against by Google Groups, that bastion for the clueless and thorn in
the side of USENET.

You, on the other hand, are part of the problem and have decided to
fight tooth and nail against changing your posting style to one that
is used by easily 90% of the rest of us because you think it's more
important to be inflammatory and keep playing your little troll games.

A good example is the IKYABWAI nonsense with which you started this
post.

I really have no need to waste any more of my precious time replying
to your inane prattle, so unless you can come up with something
intersting, goodbye.

JF
Just block "Google Groups" period. Problem gone...

--
Best Regards:
Baron.
 
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:42:23 -0800 (PST), Michael B
<baughfam@bellsouth.net> wrote:

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
 
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:59:02 +0000, baron
<baron.nospam@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:

John Fields Inscribed thus:


On Jan 12, 10:06 am, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:35:34 -0800 (PST), Michael B
baughfam@bellsouth.net> wrote:

it's not like we'd be any worse off without you.

You're right. You've done a good job of making things bad,
I doubt anyone could make it much worse.

---
Made things bad???

All I've done is point out to you that, on USENET, bottom posting is
preferable to top posting and that your incessant use of the evil top
posting method is frowned upon by most of USENET and even advised
against by Google Groups, that bastion for the clueless and thorn in
the side of USENET.

You, on the other hand, are part of the problem and have decided to
fight tooth and nail against changing your posting style to one that
is used by easily 90% of the rest of us because you think it's more
important to be inflammatory and keep playing your little troll games.

A good example is the IKYABWAI nonsense with which you started this
post.

I really have no need to waste any more of my precious time replying
to your inane prattle, so unless you can come up with something
intersting, goodbye.

JF

Just block "Google Groups" period. Problem gone...
---
You're right, but some of the posts from Google Groups are OK, though,
and if I did a global block I'd miss them, so plonking the goons or just
ignoring them might be better.

JF
 
You should show more confidence than to refer to yourself like that. This
seems to apply generally to your post browsing.


<nospam@nevis.com> wrote in message news:4b4e7148$1@news.x-privat.org...
I'm using a newsreader that does all that, you are the problem, not
anyone's newsreader. By top posting and misappropriating quotes
nobody has any idea who or what you are referring to.


Josepi wrote:
I guess that proves it then by your fine example. Thanx

Time to get rid of that cheap POS "newsreader" that use try to browse
Usenets posts with, apparently.

Get one that can thread and read the associated headers with the text and
try to keep any relevent text with your response. This will make it more
apparent what you are referring to next time.
 
NO. Not the same effect. If you soldered the ends of the multistrands you
would have 200 turns only. You would have 10 parallel coils sharing current,
unevenly, due to connection differences and differing reluctance between
strands.

For 2000 turns, you put the form in a hand drill, measure the gearing step
up ratio and count hand crank turns mentally. 2000 / 10 = 200 turns only.


"Michael B" <baughfam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:5ca00b3b-0c77-47ad-8145-bd6d5bd0a2e6@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
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.

On Jan 13, 12:14 pm, "Josepi" <J...@invaliid.con> wrote:
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.
 
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:28:55 -0500, "Josepi" <JRM@invaliid.con> wrote:

NO. Not the same effect. If you soldered the ends of the multistrands you
would have 200 turns only. You would have 10 parallel coils sharing current,
unevenly, due to connection differences and differing reluctance between
strands.

For 2000 turns, you put the form in a hand drill, measure the gearing step
up ratio and count hand crank turns mentally. 2000 / 10 = 200 turns only.
---
The snow hid it well.
he slipped and fell, the knife killed,
but there was no loss.

JF
 
John Fields wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:28:55 -0500, "Josepi" <JRM@invaliid.con> wrote:


NO. Not the same effect. If you soldered the ends of the multistrands you
would have 200 turns only. You would have 10 parallel coils sharing current,
unevenly, due to connection differences and differing reluctance between
strands.

For 2000 turns, you put the form in a hand drill, measure the gearing step
up ratio and count hand crank turns mentally. 2000 / 10 = 200 turns only.


---
The snow hid it well.
he slipped and fell, the knife killed,
but there was no loss.

JF
Nice.

A perfect center.
Hike you said, and it made sense,
most enjoyable.

Ed
 
Josepi wrote:
You should show more confidence than to refer to yourself like that. This
seems to apply generally to your post browsing.
Hi Sarah, how's things in Alaska?
 
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:17:54 -0500, ehsjr <ehsjr@nospamverizon.net>
wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:28:55 -0500, "Josepi" <JRM@invaliid.con> wrote:


NO. Not the same effect. If you soldered the ends of the multistrands you
would have 200 turns only. You would have 10 parallel coils sharing current,
unevenly, due to connection differences and differing reluctance between
strands.

For 2000 turns, you put the form in a hand drill, measure the gearing step
up ratio and count hand crank turns mentally. 2000 / 10 = 200 turns only.


---
The snow hid it well.
he slipped and fell, the knife killed,
but there was no loss.

JF

Nice.

A perfect center.
Hike you said, and it made sense,
most enjoyable.

Ed
---
:)

JF
 
On 2010-01-14, Michael B <baughfam@bellsouth.net> wrote:
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?
it'd behave basically the same as a single thicker strand

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.
no, it would be different, it'd peak sooner,
but not neccessarily higher

muliple joins could get you 2000 turns and similar performance
to 2000 straight turns but inter-turn capacitance would be much worse.

I would get a drill to turn the former and use some sort of counter to
count turns, possibly the mechanical counter from an old VCR.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
 
Turns out he was a Toyota Paid Shill all along. Slot cars indeed.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/toyota-executive-sees-limi...
Mostly induction. Here in the SW we can do slots.


Bret Cahill
 
On Jan 14, 7:31 am, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:42:23 -0800 (PST), Michael B

baugh...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
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
Thanks.
Lets me know I can't take a shortcut on another project.
 
On Jan 15, 10:12 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
Turns out he was a Toyota Paid Shill all along. Slot cars indeed.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/toyota-executive-sees-limi...

Mostly induction.  Here in the SW we can do slots.

Bret Cahill
But whatever it is, they are putting some money into the idea.

-tg
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top