Skip to main content

Electromagnet Impedance

The data taken last week showed a linear dependence between the voltage measured in the pick-up coil when the superconductor is levitated and the frequency of the current driving the levitating electromagnet.



While reading an article on a susceptometer for superconductors, I came across the graph shown below that shows the decrease in the magnetic field of a solenoid driven at 5 V rms as frequency is increase.  A solenoid is an inductor with an impedance that is linearly dependent on the frequency of the current flowing through it.  The drop in the magnetic field is a result of of the impedance of the solenoid increasing with increasing frequency and reducing the current trough the coil.






I'd like to see if the linear increase in the voltage required to attain levitation is just a result of the increasing impedance of the electromagnet.  My first task was to determine a relationshiop between the pick-up coil voltage and the voltage driving the electromagnet.  To do that, I attached one channel of the oscilloscope to the supply leads of the electromagnet and another channel to the pick-up coil leads.  With the oscilloscope in x-y mode, the first channel is used as the x sweep voltage and the second channel is used as the y sweep voltage.  This resulted in the waveform shown below:

Taking the slope of the loop, gives about 26 mV on the pick-up coil for every 5V on the electromagnet supply.  Using this slope, the data taken last week can be related back to the electromagnet's supply voltage:

The data point near 180 V on the calculated graph seemed somewhat unrealistic at first because the amplifier docuemntation specifies a maximum voltage swign of 93 V into 8 ohms.  The electromagnet, however, has an impedance of about 28 ohms at these frequencies.  Just to perform a sanity check, I'm plugging an estimated rms output power of 1000 watts into  the following equation:

which can be rearranged to give an rms voltage of:

Using a power estimate of 1000 Watts and a driving frequency of 230 Hz, I wind up with a peak voltage of roughly 229 volts, so my data fits within the estimated maximum output voltage from the amplifier.

If the voltage-frequency line in the levitation data was just due to impedance effects I'd expect to see a flat line when graphing the current through the electromagnet vs. frequency.  In other words, the voltage just had to be increased in order to keep the current constant.  I'm modelling the electromagnet as the following circuit based on the reading of an impedance meter:

This gives me a calculated current vs. frequency that looks like:


The current line isn't flat, so there are other things going on.  Bean's model of type II superconductors in AC magnetic fields predicts a power loss that is linear with increasing frequency.  I'll take a look at that tomorrow.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Cowbell! Record Production using Google Forms and Charts

First, the what : This article shows how to embed a new Google Form into any web page. To demonstrate ths, a chart and form that allow blog readers to control the recording levels of each instrument in Blue Oyster Cult's "(Don't Fear) The Reaper" is used. HTML code from the Google version of the form included on this page is shown and the parts that need to be modified are highlighted. Next, the why : Google recently released an e-mail form feature that allows users of Google Documents to create an e-mail a form that automatically places each user's input into an associated spreadsheet. As it turns out, with a little bit of work, the forms that are created by Google Docs can be embedded into any web page. Now, The Goods: Click on the instrument you want turned up, click the submit button and then refresh the page. Through the magic of Google Forms as soon as you click on submit and refresh this web page, the data chart will update immediately. Turn up the:

Cool Math Tricks: Deriving the Divergence, (Del or Nabla) into New (Cylindrical) Coordinate Systems

Now available as a Kindle ebook for 99 cents ! Get a spiffy ebook, and fund more physics The following is a pretty lengthy procedure, but converting the divergence, (nabla, del) operator between coordinate systems comes up pretty often. While there are tables for converting between common coordinate systems , there seem to be fewer explanations of the procedure for deriving the conversion, so here goes! What do we actually want? To convert the Cartesian nabla to the nabla for another coordinate system, say… cylindrical coordinates. What we’ll need: 1. The Cartesian Nabla: 2. A set of equations relating the Cartesian coordinates to cylindrical coordinates: 3. A set of equations relating the Cartesian basis vectors to the basis vectors of the new coordinate system: How to do it: Use the chain rule for differentiation to convert the derivatives with respect to the Cartesian variables to derivatives with respect to the cylindrical variables. The chain

The Valentine's Day Magnetic Monopole

There's an assymetry to the form of the two Maxwell's equations shown in picture 1.  While the divergence of the electric field is proportional to the electric charge density at a given point, the divergence of the magnetic field is equal to zero.  This is typically explained in the following way.  While we know that electrons, the fundamental electric charge carriers exist, evidence seems to indicate that magnetic monopoles, the particles that would carry magnetic 'charge', either don't exist, or, the energies required to create them are so high that they are exceedingly rare.  That doesn't stop us from looking for them though! Keeping with the theme of Fairbank[1] and his academic progeny over the semester break, today's post is about the discovery of a magnetic monopole candidate event by one of the Fairbank's graduate students, Blas Cabrera[2].  Cabrera was utilizing a loop type of magnetic monopole detector.  Its operation is in concept very sim