Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 08:49:37 PM

Title: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 08:49:37 PM
hello

I'm looking to get some laminated "magnet wire".

The instructions I am trying to follow are using the European metric system - i think.

So, the wire gauge is expressed as a ratio.

Can someone tell me what gauge "4/10 mm magnet wire" is in American AWG?

Thanks

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: elecar on September 25, 2013, 08:58:08 PM
4.10    it is 6 AWG
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 09:00:02 PM
i don't understand.

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: elecar on September 25, 2013, 09:04:29 PM
You said    ""4/10 mm magnet wire" "

If that is meant to be 4.10 then it is  6 AWG
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: elecar on September 25, 2013, 09:13:03 PM
You need to know if it is  mm  or  mm2

4.10 mm   is   6 AWG
4.10 mm2 is  11 AWG
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 09:39:36 PM
I attached two images showing the wire I'm looking for.

Each image has magnets and I give their dimensions as a frame of reference.

Can you tell me the AWG of this magnet wire?

Thank you.
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: elecar on September 25, 2013, 09:55:54 PM
Well that is nowhere near 4 mm so it must be   4 tenths of a mm  or 4 tenths of a mm2

If it is 0.40mm it is     26 AWG
if it is  0.40mm2 it is  21 AWG
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 10:11:38 PM
it was written as "4/10mm copper wire".

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: gyulasun on September 25, 2013, 10:48:31 PM
Folks,  4/10 means  4 divided by 10   i.e. 0.4 mm  this is the outside diameter of the enameled copper wire.

from a web awg - mm tablet awg #26 corresponds to the 0.405 mm wire, so you can use #26 enameled copper wire.

Gyula

PS carlprad:  your sentence in the first post "laminated" magnet wire makes no sense to me.  MAybe you meant enameled??
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 10:51:35 PM
got it, thanks.

Finally, how do I figure out the right number of windings.

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: the_big_m_in_ok on September 25, 2013, 11:00:11 PM
I attached two images showing the wire I'm looking for.

Each image has magnets and I give their dimensions as a frame of reference.

Can you tell me the AWG of this magnet wire?

Thank you.
I tried to count the number of turns next to the round 10mm magnet.   I got 14 or 15.   (The turns appear to be overlapped in at least one place on the toroid.)   Then I looked at an Internet conversion list of AWG diameters against mm in width for diameters.   If 15/10mm =  .66mm, then the wire is 22 ga---but it's not a direct correlation in diameters---my finding to the actual guage measurement.
But, is the European nomenclature meaning "4/10mm" as equal to .4mm?   If so, the wire is 26 ga., which is an actual correlation.   26 ga. wire is .4 mm in diameter.

The wire appears to be that diameter in dimension on the pictured toroid.

--Lee

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 11:02:53 PM
Lee

Ok, so you agree with gyulasun, its probably 26 AWG?

Thanks

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: the_big_m_in_ok on September 25, 2013, 11:10:08 PM
Lee

Ok, so you agree with gyulasun, its probably 26 AWG?

Thanks
Visually, on the picture, I'd say, "Yes."   But my question is:  Do the Europeans amongst the Members believe that  '4/10mm' = .4mm?
I'm familiar with European wiring schematic standards by weight of personal experience.   The written description is something I've never seen, however.

--Lee

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 11:17:43 PM
Lastly, what is "0.1mm wire" in AWG?

And, yes, gyulasun you are correct. I meant "enameled".

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: gyulasun on September 25, 2013, 11:28:06 PM
Visually, on the picture, I'd say, "Yes."   But my question is:  Do the Europeans amongst the Members believe that  '4/10mm' = .4mm?
I'm familiar with European wiring schematic standards by weight of personal experience.   The written description is something I've never seen, however.

--Lee

Hi Lee,

Jean L Naudin has been using fractions for wire diameters for decades now. See here for instance:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm)

Maybe the French use it, Germans and others may be not, it is more common to use 0.5 or  .5  formats.

from this link http://www.technick.net/public/code/cp_dpage.php?aiocp_dp=guide_awg_to_metric (http://www.technick.net/public/code/cp_dpage.php?aiocp_dp=guide_awg_to_metric)  0.1 mm wire is equivalent to awg #38
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 11:31:20 PM
k, thanks so much.

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: gyulasun on September 25, 2013, 11:34:14 PM

Finally, how do I figure out the right number of windings.

Here is a link to a freely downloadable software to calculate the number of turns, even for an unknown toroidal core.  There other online calculators if you search for it like  "toroid coil  calculator".

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 11:37:22 PM
Gyula

I looked at the Naudin page you posted.

Did you ever try his experiment?

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: gyulasun on September 25, 2013, 11:45:10 PM
I tested only the Motionless Electromagnetic generator i.e. MEG but never got any extra output higher than the input (I had about 87% efficiency).  Naudin used non-linear (carbon based) resistors to load the outputs in the later MEG versions which made no sense whatsoever.

No I have not built the project in the link I posted to his site.
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 11:49:30 PM
Gyula

I am new to all this and am basically just having some fun learning about all the incredible experiments you are all conducting.

When you say that Naudin used carbon based resistors in the "later MEG", do you mean the 2SGen, or some other MEG?

Thanks

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 25, 2013, 11:53:05 PM
Gyula

can you also repost the link to the toroid calculator, I could not find it.

Thanks

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: gyulasun on September 25, 2013, 11:59:08 PM
I mean that till MEG version 2.1 he used correct, non inductive resistors see the first half of this link: http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/megv21.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/megv21.htm)

but later on when he referred to his MEG version 3 (in the bottom half of the link) he used a "conditioned" 100 kOhm carbon resistor which has a non-linear property of changing its resistance as the voltage changes across it...  or he suggested using a MOV as the load which is also a nonlinear (metal-oxid varistor) component...
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: gyulasun on September 26, 2013, 12:00:50 AM
Gyula

can you also repost the link to the toroid calculator, I could not find it.

Thanks

yes I inserted now also above, sorry  http://www.dl5swb.de/html/mini_ring_core_calculator.htm
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 26, 2013, 12:01:18 AM
oh, I see.

You are not referring to the 2SGen then?

By the way, can you give me the link tot he toroid calculator?

Thanks

Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: carlprad on September 26, 2013, 12:02:07 AM
Title: Re: really stupid question.
Post by: the_big_m_in_ok on September 26, 2013, 04:27:59 AM
Hi Lee,

Jean L Naudin has been using fractions for wire diameters for decades now. See here for instance:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm)

Maybe the French use it, Germans and others may be not, it is more common to use 0.5 or  .5  formats.
@gyulasun
Good to hear from you.
I did see reference to the wire diameter wording in jnaudin's site above.   Interesting.   Whether or not he's alone in writing wire diameter descriptions that way is open to question.   Others in his country may take exception to his wording if they were really unfamiliar with it.   Those who research both European and American wiring schematics would immediately see significant differences in component identification symbols.   Capacitors are an obvious example to me.

--Lee