Author Topic: Magnet Strength Relationships  (Read 4298 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tritium

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
Magnet Strength Relationships
« on: December 12, 2008, 03:38:43 PM »
IN the Dan's new book there is a section about upsizing.

Their 20 footer uses about 133 cubic inches of magnet in the alternator but I think they used  N42 magnets. I have 100 cubic inches of N50 magnets. Would this be roughly equivalent to the 133 cu inches of N42's in terms of power production if all other factors remain the same as the Dan's 20 footer?


Thurmond

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 03:38:43 PM by (unknown) »

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2008, 08:58:47 AM »
This is not at all easy. If you have N50 magnets then they will work fine if they are the same dimensions.


Cubic inches means very little. If the dimensions are identical you will do a bit better with N50, you could manage with a few less turns or you could increase the stator thickness and use a bit thicker wire, either way would get you similar results or you could keep everything the same and open the gap and have a bit more clearance.


You will not manage to use much smaller magnets just because you use N50. You could manage with slightly thinner ones or you could keep the same thickness and use a slightly smaller area ( shorter or narrower or both). I am not sure that you will make up a 33% reduction in volume but it may depend on which dimensions are changed.


I am sure it will work as long as you choose turns to give the same cut in but  I suspect your alternator will be less powerful than with the bigger N42.


I wouldn't use N50 unless you could get identical sizes for less cost but if you have them you should get away with it with the reduced size, just watch furling and don't push your luck.


Flux

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 08:58:47 AM by Flux »

Tritium

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #2 on: December 12, 2008, 09:03:33 AM »
They are round 1" thick by 2" diameter and I got them very cheap (for about the cost of 1/2" by 2" N42's). The Dan's used 3" X 1.5" X 3/4" thick I think.


Thurmond

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 09:03:33 AM by Tritium »

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2008, 09:47:25 AM »
I am sure they will work but make the coils round or oval with hole a bit smaller than the magnet. You may benefit from slightly larger discs. You will have to do a test coil to be sure where you are going and a stator 3/4" thick would be a reasonable thing to aim for.


Flux

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 09:47:25 AM by Flux »

tanner0441

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Country: wales
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2008, 01:24:53 PM »
hi


Is there not a problem, I read on here, with lower curie temperature with the higher N numbers, some as low as 40C. If a PMA is working hard enough to burn the winding could it also take the magnets out...


Brian

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 01:24:53 PM by tanner0441 »

Todd a

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #5 on: December 12, 2008, 07:51:46 PM »
2"x1" N42 magnets have a pull strength of 176lbs.  The N50 has a pull strength of 230lbs.  This is about a 30% increase in strength and will likely get you close to what you are looking for.... I think.  I am not sure if surface area is more important that the actual pull strength.  A 3"x1" N50 has a 290lbs pull, but has over 2x the surface area.  It might actually turn out that using N50 will actually work better than increasing the surface area by 1/3.  Increasing thickness increases the pull by quite a bit.  A 2"x2" N48 has a 395lbs pull.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 07:51:46 PM by Todd a »

Tritium

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #6 on: December 12, 2008, 08:56:30 PM »
Todd,


I am pretty sure I have seen post by Flux indicating pull of a magnet had little to do with the output of an alternator. I am just trying to get a handle on the relationships involved with all magnetic parameters to make alternator design more plug and play than total experimentation (trial and error). Obviously magnet Gauss strength is one parameter, surface area is another, flux density in the gap between magnet surfaces is yet another. How do they interplay is my quest.


Thurmond

« Last Edit: December 12, 2008, 08:56:30 PM by Tritium »

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2008, 02:24:44 AM »
I say it again, pull is meaningless unless you want magnets for holding or pulling.


It makes sense to work the magnet at its BH max point so it seems best to stick with an air gap flux half of Br. This value is mainly the one that changes with grade so for normal use expect about 1.25 x the flux in a gap for N50 compared with N40.


Ideally the best operating point will be with an air gap equal to the total magnet thickness ( magnetic length but it seems to cause confusion if I call it length). In real life there is leakage and other issues to deal with  so you will probably end up using an air gap about 1.5 times the thickness of one magnet.


At this point you will see about 1/2 of the makers figure (Br) for N40 you will have a bit over 600mT. N50 will probably get 700 or a bit more.


What effect circular magnets has is something that I have no experience of, I have never used any. I also don't really know the best shape for coils with round magnets.


I think you can crowd round ones closer together than rectangular ones on the discs and get away with it nut I still would not crowd them too close. With them crowded you will probably be better off with the coils squashed into ellipses but if you don't crowd them then I would expect circular ones to be better. Similarly in the ideal world the hole should be the size of the magnet but you are trading open circuit voltage against circuit resistance and the resistance will be a bigger factor so smaller hole will probably win the day.


You can calculate the flux bit and the open circuit voltage pretty well but volts alone are not he thing you are interested in, I find it nearly impossible to convince people. If your voltage gain comes at the price of higher winding resistance you will be on a looser.


Design in the end comes down to balancing all these factors. I have a fairly good idea how it works for rectangular magnets but as I have never tried round ones I advised you to do a test coil.


Flux

« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 02:24:44 AM by Flux »

TomW

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 5130
  • Country: us
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2008, 06:20:08 AM »
flux;




I find it nearly impossible to convince people. If your voltage gain comes at the price of higher winding resistance you will be on a looser.


Yeah, those guys like Ohm and Betz sure ruined the easy fun.


It seems common that folks miss the fact that Ohms Law applies to both sources and loads.


Alway appreciate your insight.


Tom

« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 06:20:08 AM by TomW »

Todd a

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2008, 08:37:20 AM »
I know the pull strength drops off exponentially as the magnet moves away, but it is all part of the the magnetic field.  If surface area was so important that people would be using much cheaper and lighter thin magnets instead of these massive (and dangerous) thicker magnets.


Like I said I do not know the details and I'm a little rough on the basics :D, but I was pulling up a way of comparing the two magnets by pull strength.  I also found the gauss numbers if those work better.  The N42 has 13200 gauss and the N50 has BrMax: 14800 gauss.  That is a 12% increase in strength.  I thought magnetic fields were rated in gauss.  Does this mean the N50's magnetic field is 12% stronger than the N42.  I was looking at the N50 3"x1" magnet and it has 14700 gauss, which is basically the same as the N50 2"x1".  It looks like increasing the surface area does not increase the strength of the magnetic field, just the size.  Would a 33% increase in surface area just make it easier to use larger coils as the magnetic field is larger, but not stronger?  So if your stator could take the stronger magnets without burning up, then adding thicker or higher grade magnets (like N50) would increase the output of the generator, but if the strength was too much you would need to redo your stator ring too (thicker wires and likely a thicker stator)?  I'm still at the beginning steps of all this and have a long way to go.  Sorry if it annoys you, I'm not trying to.

« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 08:37:20 AM by Todd a »

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2008, 10:51:16 AM »
You can use pull to compare identical shape magnets of the same size but otherwise it is no a useful indicator. It would take too long to explain why. I assume the makers or suppliers give this figure for those who want to use magnetic clamps and fastenings.


Unless you have a decent grasp of magnetics and electrics it's a bit difficult explaining all this but I will try.


For comparison of magnets there are a few factors that are useful. What you need for an alternator is the flux per pole crossing the air gap. The Br that you mention is the flux density that the magnet will maintain when magnetised in a closed loop and the magnetising field is removed. You can never get that value in an air gap, but it is a useful comparison figure. The N number is the energy product of the neo material and is the product of remenance and coercivity ( the ability to resist demagnetising).


The number is in megagauss Oersted but just the N number is the comparison. With neo the coercivity doesn't change much between the grades so the Br value is more or less proportional to the grade.As you show in your figures the Br increases roughly as the grade number.


Now the flux per pole depends on the magnet area,  flux is B x area. That means that increasing magnet area results in more flux. The flux also depends on the air gap. If we use a tiny gap we have lots of flux and if the gap is large the flux falls. To obtain the same flux in a larger gap we need a thicker magnet and the value of B in the gap depends on the ratio of the gap length to magnet length(in this case we mean thickness by magnetic length)


If we build an iron cored machine we can use small air gaps and the magnet thickness can be smaller than for air gap type alternators. The snag with iron is that it saturates and for higher flux the thing eventually behaves more like an air gap so you need thicker than you would expect even with an iron core if you want much power.


Considering air gap machines you can get a lot of flux in a small air gap with thin magnets but unfortunately you can't get much copper in a small gap. You can get any volts you want with thin wire but the resistance will restrict the current and hence power out. The only to get more power is to use a wider gap to take thicker wire and that means using thick magnets.


Even with neo magnets You need a lot of it for much power, you need very much more with the lesser grades of magnet such as ferrite and magnet steels.


Using the highest grade neo cuts the volume required so you would save about 12% by using N50 over N40 but unless size or weight is the only factor you may find it cheaper to get the same result with more N40. Also depends on where you buy it and the deal you get but in general anything over N40/42 is not cost effective.


Things don't end there, you also need to consider the wind related bit. The alternator needs to match the prop. If you do something to make the alternator more powerful then you mess up the match to the prop and to keep things on track you need a bigger prop.


You end up playing with many variables, magnets, turns, wire size etc. You have to have an alternator with thick enough wire not to cook but you need to match it to the prop if it is to work well. Sometimes changing to a higher grade magnet in an existing design may bring no benefit and increase the cost so it's not easy.


If you take all this into account at the design stage you may be able to produce a better machine with higher grade magnets but it may end up needing a bigger prop or a wider air gap for the same prop and the cost may be higher for no improvement if you go that way.


Hope this helps, I know its not easy.


Flux

« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 10:51:16 AM by Flux »

Todd a

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2008, 12:56:44 PM »
"Now the flux per pole depends on the magnet area"  This make a bit more sense.  I always assumed that just moving the wire (or coil) into the magnetic field made electrons flow one way (positive) and move the wire (or coil) out of the magnetic field cause the electrons to flow the other way.


"To obtain the same flux in a larger gap we need a thicker magnet and the value of B in the gap depends on the ratio of the gap length to magnet length(in this case we mean thickness by magnetic length)"  So you really only need thicker magnets if you have a large are gap or a thick stator ring to help push those Flux line (based on surface area) through that gap and stator.  Is there any real guide to magnet thickness and total gap (air gap+stator)?  Say a 1" thick magnet for a 1" gap... kind of thing (half if you use 2 magnet plates...).


"Using the highest grade neo cuts the volume required so you would save about 12% by using N50 over N40 but unless size or weight is the only factor you may find it cheaper to get the same result with more N40."  I realized that... It just sounded like he already had the N50.  The place I get magnets from it is about half the price (or less) to get N42 instead of N50.


"The alternator needs to match the prop."  It sounded like an upgrade option to the generator design... like to go with a slightly larger prop or possibly even for a higher wind area.


So if I understand this right then, a wider magnet would generate more electricity with the same stator ring, but a thicker (or higher N rating) magnet would let you use a thicker stator ring instead (or a larger air gap).  The other thing with this...  If you add iron on either side of a magnet, are increasing the surface area and possibly the amount of Flux rings, but you would weaken the penetration (requiring a thinner air gap and stator ring)... or would adding the metal not add more flux (possibly just change the shape of the field)?  Also is having 2 magnet plates with say 1/2" thick magnets or one with 1" thick magnets better.  I have heard some say using 2 magnets plates is pretty much a requirement and produces a lot more power.

« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 12:56:44 PM by Todd a »

Tritium

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
Re: Magnet Strength Relationships
« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2008, 09:06:10 PM »
Thank you very much Flux,


It is becoming clearer because of your explanations. Even though they are usually over my head they always have the benefit of providing new areas of study, and a better understanding of the topics in question.


Thurmond

« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 09:06:10 PM by Tritium »