The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: Roy McCammon
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (nscd2)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
Subject: Re: Problem with magnetic boundary conditions
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 06:10:52 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:10:52 CST
Organization: Road Runner - Texas
Chris Carlen wrote:
> Where I see an apparent contradiction is with the following: I have
> developed the picture that magnetic field strength H may be understood
> as the causative agent of magnetic flux density. Magnetic flux density
> appears in response to H according to the relation B=u H. Fine.
unwarranted assumption. Think of Ohms law V = RI, it
says that there is a relationship between I and V, but it
doesn't say that V causes I or that I causes V. Its the
same with H and B.
> What is happening with the H? Yes I know that u1 H1n = u2 H2n, but
> that's just the equation. I want to understand if or how the H can be
> affected by the core piece. There is nothing in what I have learned
> from the Biot-Savart Law that indicates that the H could have changed by
> the addition of the core piece. So either the boundary condition is
> right and the Biot Savort Law isn't , or vice/versa.
the way this is all saved is to say that the magnetic
domains in the core align in a way that is equivalent
to currents circulating the surface of the core. Put
those currents into the calculation of H and all will be well.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup