In Reply to: Your thoughts please. posted by jea48 on February 21, 2014 at 08:49:25:
Just what exactly do you want our thoughts on? My hunch is that there is just some semantic confusion going on.
Think about an electric circuit compared to a V-belt and pulleys, they are pretty good analogies. They both just provide a conduit to allow the transfer of energy spatially from where it's available to the point where you want to do work. (work as in getting hot.)
If you don't do any work at the receiving end then all that happens is that some energy is wasted by the less than perfect transfer mechanism and also some is stored in the mechanism itself in the process of it getting fired up to transfer the energy. Part of the latter is usually recovered when the system achieves a steady state or shuts down.
So let's say the V-belt connects an electric motor to a lathe. When you start the motor it revs up from nothing to it's nominal speed and during the transient interval while it's accelerating it stores energy in the mass of it's rotor, the stretch of it's V-belt and the mass of the rotating chuck and any workpiece attached to it. That's momentum for you...
Once it's all up to speed (and before you start cutting) the belt stretch is recovered and the energy stored in the rotor and head is constant and it's only drawing enough power from the line to cover friction.
For simplicity let's say that this is the '40s in New England and the circuit is DC. Naturally when you close the switch the motor has no back EMF and looks like it's DC resistance causing a large initial current to flow. Electricity can't stretch like the belt so it stores it's transient energy, it's momentum, by emitting photons which form a magnetic field around the conductor. Like the belt, as the load stabilizes they more or less snap back to the moving electrons returning most of the start-up transient.
I hope this helps a little, it's off-the-cuff so if it doesn't make sense (or it's wrong) it's my fault...
Regards, Rick
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Your thoughts please. - rick_m 13:50:31 02/21/14 (18)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - jea48 08:14:02 02/22/14 (17)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - rick_m 20:13:31 02/22/14 (16)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - jea48 12:19:09 02/23/14 (0)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - jea48 12:18:42 02/23/14 (0)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - jea48 12:18:13 02/23/14 (0)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - zako 08:40:30 02/23/14 (12)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - geoffkait 05:38:36 02/25/14 (11)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - jea48 09:30:42 02/25/14 (10)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - tomservo 10:33:21 03/07/14 (6)
- RE: Your theory doesn't hold water. - jea48 06:55:51 03/09/14 (5)
- RE: Your theory doesn't hold water. - tomservo 05:52:23 03/10/14 (4)
- RE: Your theory doesn't hold water. - jea48 15:55:20 03/11/14 (3)
- RE: Your theory doesn't hold water. - tomservo 10:40:45 03/13/14 (2)
- RE: Your theory doesn't hold water. - jea48 22:23:21 03/15/14 (1)
- RE: Your theory doesn't hold water. - Tony Lauck 08:44:10 03/16/14 (0)
- RE: Your thoughts please. - geoffkait 10:41:53 02/25/14 (2)
- Please! Agree? Disagree? And Why? - jea48 11:14:09 02/25/14 (1)
- RE: "Get off the fence." Huh? - geoffkait 11:32:31 02/25/14 (0)