[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Magnetazation of Toroid
>Message-ID: <199608080225.UAA01860-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
>Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:25:40 -0600
>From: Tesla List <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
>Subject: Re: Magnetazation of Toroid
>From huffman-at-d0tokensun.fnal.govWed Aug 7 19:14:18 1996
>Date: Wed, 7 Aug 96 08:09:38 CDT
>From: Dave Huffman <huffman-at-d0tokensun.fnal.gov>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>
>
>Hi Skip & All,
>I have tried a super magnet to deflect the 'arcs' with no apparent
>effect. Since the current is very small, so is the force exerted.
At TRIUMF, charged particles and magnetic fields are our existence.
This is also true of your lab, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.
I shall talk about the accelerated electron, but the same concepts
apply to all charged particles.
You I believe you have made a slight error in your thinking. The
force felt by an electron experiencing a given magnetic field has
nothing to do with the presence of other electrons feeling the same
field. If the beam current gets so intense so that via its own
magnetic field it actually interferes with the incident magnetic
field, then there is an effect. But to create such a field strong
enough to be comparable to the hand-held ferrite magnets, this will
be at beam currents of several amps or several 10's of amps, not
microamps or milliamps. So the influence of a magnetic field on a
beam of electrons is not affected to any great degree by the
amplitude of a low-intensity beam such as the streamers from a
Tesla Coil. What the degree of bending *is* affected by is of
course the *energy* of each electron. The more accelerating
voltage behind (or in front of) the electron, the greater will the
energy gain be in a given distance, and the more difficult it is to
deflect magnetically at right angles to the direction of the
electrostatic acceleration. Thus the "stiffness" of an electron
beam, or any charged particle beam, has to do with the energy and
the mass of the idividual particles, not really the *number* of
particles (and current is the number of singly-charged particles
per second). This effect is typically often seen in TV's and
computer screens where the screen HV regulation is poor. A change
in brightness produces a change in the screen high-voltage, and
the picture blooms (gets bigger) when it gets bright as the beam
current increases and the accelerating screen voltage falls (by
beam loading) making the more intense beam easier to deflect by the
deflection coils; the picture shrinks when it gets dark because
the screen HV goes up making the less intense electron beam stiffer
and more difficult to bend.
In a gas arc over a certain range of currents, the larger currents
are more easily deflected because the accelerating voltage is less
in an intense arc due to the negative-resistance characteristic of
arcs. Strange as it seems, within this range, lower-intensity arcs
have a higher voltage across them than more intense arcs.
>Large currents, arc welder, are readly influenced by strong magnets.
>(rail guns)
This is mostly not due to negative-resistance effects, nor
intensity effects, but simply because of the low accelerating
voltages. The *energy* of the individual charged particles
(hundreds of electon-volts) is low by orders of magnitude when
compared to the discharge from a Tesla Coil with millions of volts
to accelerate the electrons.
>Tesla did discover that under certain conditions some discharges
>became extremely sensitive to magnetic fields. He suggested that
>information could be sent this way.
>BTW a super magnet will cause a dark spot in a florescent lamp.
>Could a very strong field 'quench' a florescent lamp?
Yes. A field which would deflect the current at right angles to its
normal flow that thus deflect it into the glass. Or, a strong
magnetic field right along the axis of the flourescent tube should
be able to cause the electrons and gas ions to travel in a tight
(constricted) spiral down the inside of the tube rather than at the
edge near the glass. Current density at spots on the filaments
would become rather high. We had an ion source we used for about
20 years that worked this way (the Ehlers Source). The arc chamber
was only a couple of inches long, though, and the gas was hydrogen.
Now we use a 'cusp' source. A ring of *intense* permanent magnets
produces magnetic fields with sharp cusps in a hydrogen plasma,
which help to maintain and focus an intense ion beam.
Either this focussing effect of a cylindrical ring of magnets or
the solenoid effect, (in the beam business known as an "Einzel
lens") makes me think it might be interesting to try something like
this cylindrical ring of magnets on top of a Tesla Coil. If the
discharges could be made to begin at the center of (and inside)
this cylinder and then travel lengthwise down the cylinder and
parallel to the internal magnetic field inside the cylinder, I have
the definite feeling that a person should be able to exert some
small degree of control and focus the discharges from the TC top
end, even though they are AC discharges. I don't know if this has
ever been tried on air arcs. It works fine in vacuum.
>Dave
All the best,
Fred W. Bach , Operations Group | Internet: music-at-triumf.ca
TRIUMF (TRI-University Meson Facility) | Voice: 604-222-1047 loc 6327/7333
4004 WESBROOK MALL, UBC CAMPUS | FAX: 604-222-1074
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., CANADA V6T 2A3
"Accuracy is important. Details can mean the difference between life & death."
These are my opinions, which should ONLY make you read, think, and question.
They do NOT necessarily reflect the views of my employer or fellow workers.