I'll pass. I misunderstood the question (thought rotation was simply spinning the magnet about its axis which is same as axis of coil) in which case the answer was simple and I tried to provide a "clever" clue would take zero time to sketch. Not clever anymore though.

Now I see the pivot point is in the center of the magnet. I think you provided plenty of information.
The waveform could be sketched in various levels of exactness. Noting that quantitative dimensional information is missing that would be required for exact solution, I'm guessing the teacher would be happy with a very simple sketch.


=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

As per graphical results from the swinging magnet experiment in the attached pdf, the voltage peak occurs when the magnet pole is just near the midpoint of the coil (for both cases of poles approaching and leaving the coil) as the rate of change of flux is maximum at that point.

So a sine wave will be induced in coil but it's pattern would alternate between double positive and negative peaks in progression as the N & S poles alternately sweep across the plane of the coil.
For eg., negative voltage peak as N pole approaches the plane of coil, then 0V at center of coil when flux is maximum and again positive voltage peak as N pole leaves the plane of coil. Same pattern will repeat but with inverted voltage peaks when S pole sweeps along. I just wanted to confirm whether my graphical assumption was correct. In my opinion this may be closest simulation of my rotating magnet case.

• https://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=3312d821-82ee-407a-b864-f

ok, you've put some thought into it. I'll tell you my opinion the teacher would be happy with a sinusoid.
The trickier part of the sinusoid would be to synchronize it with the magnet.
Max rate of change of flux (max voltage magnitude) occurs where magnet is vertical, min rate of change of flux (min voltage magnitude) occurs where magnet is aligned to the axis.
If you want to get the polarity correct, remember positive-direction flux loop flows from N->S outside a magnet, and remember the direction of induced voltage/current would be in a direction that tends to oppose the change in flux.... to figure that out you also have to remember your handrule taking note of the direction that the coil is wound.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

'Max rate of change of flux (max voltage magnitude) occurs where magnet is vertical, min rate of change of flux (min voltage magnitude) occurs where magnet is aligned to the axis'.

But as per the results of the swinging magnet experiment, the max. voltage peak occurs when pole is at a position near to the center of the coil and not when the magnet has swung away from the face of the coil. Wouldn't the same waveform pattern mimic for the rotating magnet case too?

> But as per the results of the swinging magnet experiment, the max. voltage peak occurs when pole is at a position near to the center of the coil and not when the magnet has swung away from the face of the coil. Wouldn't the same waveform pattern mimic for the rotating magnet case too?

I didn't delve into the swinging magnet but if it's like a pendululm than it is not moving at constant velocity. That may be the difference.

In your assigned problem there's not reason to assume anything other than a constant rotational velocity.
So it gives a sinusoidal flux (as a reasonable approximation assuming air coil... depends on level of detail required) .... max flux when the magnet is horizontal and zero flux when the magnet is vertical
But you're interested in rate of change of flux. Max rate of change of a sinusoid occurs at the zero and min rate of change occurs at the peak of the sinusoid.
So max induced voltage when magnet is vertical, min when horizontal.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

I had a different interpretation - I took center of rotation as center of magnet since there is a dot there that could be a pivot.

Note op stated "bar magnet spinning perpendicular to axis of coil", which is admittedly vague, doesn't exactly match either of our interpretations (magnet is not spinning in the plane perpendicular to the axis).

I can't answer with 100% certainty what was intended. I give the teacher an F on this question.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

bar magnet SPIN axis perpendicular to axis of coil

There, do you feel better

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

Note op stated "bar magnet spinning perpendicular to axis of coil", which is admittedly vague, doesn't exactly match either of our interpretations (magnet is not spinning in the plane perpendicular to the axis).

The illustration at the beginning of the thread clearly indicates the position of the magnet wrt the coil. I don't think there should be any doubt in interpretation of the apparatus after that.

> The illustration at the beginning of the thread clearly indicates the position of the magnet wrt the coil. I don't think there should be any doubt in interpretation of the apparatus after that.

We see where it is, we're just not 100% certain where it's going.
I interpreted it as pivoting about the centerpoint shown on the magnet.
Bill interpreted it as pivoting around the centerpoint of the handle held by the mysterious hand above the magnet. ("Assuming that the center of rotation is the fist...")

Bill asked if his interpretation is correct.
Since it's your grade on the line (and you might have a better feel for what types of problems the prof is likely to throw at you), we'll go with your answer. So what is your answer?
=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

I interpreted it as pivoting about the centerpoint shown on the magnet.

Your interpretation is correct. It's just like a primitive hand driven permanent magnet generator.

From the swinging magnet experiment representation I presume the sinusoids will reverse direction for each pole generating double positive and negative peaks at regular intervals in time. I don't know if it's correct to assume as such.

Thanks for the feedback.

I had in mind that one complete rotation of the magnet would give one complete cycle of the sinusoid which is the simplest possible answer to the question. It's not necessarily the most accurate, but again you don't have a lot of dimensional data to work with to sketch a more quantitatively correct solution which makes me think the prof was looking for the simple solution.

Certainly if there was an iron core in the winding, the sinusoid could be quite a bit more distorted due to gap geometry as the magnet swings by the end of the core, but the figure suggests an air core winding to me.

If we want to compare it to the pendulum waveform, remember again the non-constant velocity of the pendulum motion, that tends to create higher velocities at the bottom and squeeze all the rate-of-change action into a narrow band of time where the magnet is near max velocity near the bottom of the swing. To convert it to my model of a rotating magnet, you'd have to stretch your pendulum waveform way out in time so that each of the two lobes in your pendulum figure would overlap with one of the lobes from an adjacent swing of an opposite-polarity magnet (same polarity voltage)... resulting in one sinusoidal cycle of voltage per magnet revolution.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

To convert it to my model of a rotating magnet, you'd have to stretch your pendulum waveform way out in time so that each of the two lobes in your pendulum figure would overlap with one of the lobes from an adjacent swing of an opposite-polarity magnet (same polarity voltage)... resulting in one sinusoidal cycle of voltage per magnet revolution.

I thought so too, but this phenomenon may apply to speed emfs (dynamo) rather than rate of change of flux emfs because when the magnet is completely vertical (90deg) wrt coil plane, the flux linking the coil would be 0. Even rate of change of flux will require presence of some finite flux element to induce emf in coil. Hence this confusion.

There will be 0 emf state whenever the poles align with the axis of coil ( as rate of change of flux linkage is 0) and also 0 emf state when the magnet poles are 90 deg wrt axis of the coil (again rate of change of flux linkage is 0). So the result should be
0 +V 0 -V 0 and 0 -V 0 +V 0 per cycle for N and S poles respectively.
I wonder what the waveform will look like.

It'll look similar to the example C in the linked article

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

It'll look similar to the example C in the linked article

Yes but will it be exactly applicable to the rotating magnet case? If so this arrangement may not be suitable for designing practical alternators, just saying.

I guess some math is in order.

EMF = -Nd(phi)/dt

Where:

d(phi)/dt = rate of change in flux = BAcos(theta)= BAcos(wt)
w=rotational speed in rad/sec
B= Magnet strength
A= Cross sectional area
N= Number of turns

Just assume some values for B,w ,A and N and get values for EMF (Yaxis) for times (X axis) and plot. Its no big guess work that it would be cosine graph.

PS : its been some time since i did some high school math so not sure if it should be cosine or sine.

> when the magnet is completely vertical (90deg) wrt coil plane, the flux linking the coil would be 0. Even rate of change of flux will require presence of some finite flux element to induce emf in coil.

I disagree. The flux is passing through zero but its derivative is not 0 (It's derivative is maximum magnitude). When a ainusoid passes through 0, its derivative (slope) is maximum.


> There will be 0 emf state whenever the poles align with the axis of coil ( as rate of change of flux linkage is 0)

Yes.

> and also 0 emf state when the magnet poles are 90 deg wrt axis of the coil (again rate of change of flux linkage is 0).

I disagree. When the magnet poles are at 90 degrees, the flux is 0 but the rate of change of flux is maximum.
Similar to how at t=0, the sin function is 0 but it's derivative (the cos function) is max.

> So the result should be

... a sinusoid whose period is the time for one full rotation of the magnet.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

I disagree. When the magnet poles are at 90 degrees, the flux is 0 but the rate of change of flux is maximum.
Similar to how at t=0, the sin function is 0 but it's derivative is max.

> So the result should be

... a sinusoid whose period is the time for one full rotation of the magnet.

Ok then why do graphical results of the swinging magnet experiment differ from the rotating magnet case? The waveform of the experiment clearly indicates that the sinusoid completes one cycle when only one pole links the coil. Another inverted sinusoid cycle will follow when the other pole links the coil, so on and so forth respectively. That means 2 sinusoid cycles for one complete rotation.

> Ok then why do graphical results of the swinging magnet experiment differ from the rotating magnet case? The waveform of the experiment clearly indicates that the sinusoid completes one cycle when only one pole links the coil. Another inverted sinusoid cycle will follow when the other pole links the coil, so on and so forth respectively. That means 2 sinusoid cycles for one complete rotation.

I already addressed this in my last paragraph 3 Jun 21 19:34 where I said "each of the two lobes in your pendulum figure would overlap with one of the lobes from an adjacent swing of an opposite-polarity magnet (same polarity voltage)... resulting in one sinusoidal cycle of voltage per magnet revolution"

Let me see if an example makes it clearer:
Let's say we swing a pole by 6 times (N, S, N, S, N, S), then I claim there are three cycles of sinusoidal voltage

Here are the individual swings and their voltage polarities:
N pole swings by creating 2 voltage pulses (+,-)
S pole swings by creating 2 voltage pulses (-,+) (note the sequence of +/- reverses when you switch the pole polarity)
N pole swings by creating 2 voltage pulses (+,-)
S pole swings by creating 2 voltage pulses (-,+)
N pole swings by creating 2 voltage pulses (+,-)
S pole swings by creating 2 voltage pulses (-,+)


Let's list all those voltage pulses next to each other in time:
(+,-) (-,+) (+,-) (-,+) (+,-) (-,+)

You'll notice that if I compare the 2nd element in one parentheses to the first element in the next parentheses, they are the same polarity. (decreasing flux from north pole as it leaves induces same polarity voltage as increasing flux from south pole as it approaches... and decreasing flux from south pole induces same polarity voltage as increasing flux from north pole)

Let's re-arrange the parentheses to emphasize what I said in previous paragraph
+ [-, -] [+, +] [-, -] [+, +] [-, -] +

Now remember what I said about overlapping. Everything I showed in square brackets represents two pulses of the same polarity that overlap in time. They form one pulse whose magnitude is the sum of the two pulses. Rewrite it as follows
+ [-] [+] [-] [+] [-] +

The five square bracketed items in the middle of the pattern would correspond to 2.5 cycles of a sin wave.
How do we treat the + at the beginning and the + at the end? IF we combined them with the additional adjacent + voltage pulse before and after from additional adjacent pole swings before and after this series of six, THEN they would each contribute a half cycle. BUT since we're not including those adjacent pulses from pole swings outside our series of six, we have to call each of those + voltage pulses at the beginning end of our pattern a quarter cycle. So we have 2.5 cycles in the middle, quarter cycle at each end, it adds up to three cycles like I said.

Sorry for so many words. This overlapping is an easy concept, but tough to explain without pictures.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

Quote (electricpete)

+ [-] [+] [-] [+] [-] +

...How do we treat the + at the beginning and the + at the end? IF we combined them with the additional adjacent + voltage pulse before and after from additional adjacent pole swings before and after this series of six, THEN they would each contribute a half cycle. BUT since we're not including those adjacent pulses from pole swings outside our series of six, we have to call each of those + voltage pulses at the beginning end of our pattern a quarter cycle. So we have 2.5 cycles in the middle, quarter cycle at each end, it adds up to three cycles like I said.

Here is an alternative (simpler) answer to my question "How do we treat the + at the beginning and the + at the end?":

• Wrap the end of the series around to the beginning like a circle (since this is a periodic sequence).
• Then the + at the end combines with the + at the beginning to form a [+].
• Now we have three [+] and three [-] for three full cycles.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

Kindly check the output voltage waveforms in the attached pdf article. This was the double peaked waveform pattern I was mentioning about. In my opinion, the rotating magnet arrangement would generate such a double peaked output voltage.

• https://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=8747b6f6-3ead-456a-8631-6

In the rotating magnet arrangement is induced emf influenced by flux cutting also or only rate of change of flux linkage?

> Kindly check the output voltage waveforms in the attached pdf article

I didn't look at it closely, but let's attack it another way...

> In my opinion, the rotating magnet arrangement would generate such a double peaked output voltage.

I think it’s useful to look at two extremes of the geometry:

• If you have a very long magnet whose end passes very close to a very short sensing coil, then clearly you will have a double peaked output voltage. It may resemble swings of the pendulum with 0 voltage between (+ - 0 - + 0 + - 0 - + )
• If you have a very short magnet a long way from the sensing coil, then you have a sinusoidal voltage.

In between, it is somewhat more difficult to say. If you have all your dimensions and you wanted to calculate the flux from your magnet in a given orientation, you could represent your permanent magnet as an air coil and use Biot Savart law.

Given that no dimensions are provided I assumed prof was interested in the simpler solution.

> In the rotating magnet arrangement is induced emf influenced by flux cutting also or only rate of change of flux linkage?

I view the problem in terms of flux linkage which is a straightforward interpretation of Faraday's law. I don't see any advantage to viewing the problem in terms of flux cutting wires.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

I view the problem in terms of flux linkage which is a straightforward interpretation of Faraday's law. I don't see any advantage to viewing the problem in terms of flux cutting wires.

So from your above statement I would presume that influence of flux cutting on induced emf may not be significant.
Are there any mathematical expressions/equations for induced emf which can represent the rotating magnet case? Thanks

> So from your above statement I would presume that influence of flux cutting on induced emf may not be significant.
I’d say flux cutting and flux linkage are two different ways of looking at the same phenomenon(I much prefer flux linkage):
Farady's law: Integral E-dot-dL = -d/dt Integral B dot dA
Voltage is left side. Time derivative of flux linkage on the right.
If you have a rectangular coil rotating in a constant magnetic field, you could calculate the flux linkage directly from Faraday by examining flux linkage as a function of angle.... that is a very straightforward application of Faraday's law imo. Alternatively you could compare the rate of flux cutting the top wire and the bottom wire (both of those contribute to the rate of change of flux linkage)... but that is a more complicated and less generalizable way to look at things.... I'd suggest not to look at it that way.

> Are there any mathematical expressions/equations for induced emf which can represent the rotating magnet case?
I would work on getting flux (at measurement location) as a function of magnet rotation angle theta and then take derivative...time derivative of sin(theta(t)) would become cos(theta(t))*w0 (by chain rule) where w0 is constant rotation rate.

As I mentioned if you represent the permanent magnet as an air coil then you can use Biot Savart
B( r) = (mu0/4/pi) * Closed-Loop-Integral {I dl x r / |r|^3} integrated along the source coil wires

If you look at the simplest case I mentioned (very short magnet … represented by a single loop coil … a very long way from the sensing coil) then as theta changes, |r| is roughly constant for all elements of the coil and the only thing that changes is the angle in the cross product, giving a sinusoidal result in terms of theta, leading to sinusoidal voltage.

For the other cases, it’s going to get a lot more complicated very quickly but I'm sure it can be done (from Biot Savart).
... OR you can use a free finite element magnetic solvers.
... OR you can do an experiment. If you don't have a coil and an oscilloscope you might be able to use your phone if it has capability to measure a magnetic field vector (example magnitude along each axis of the phone). I'm not sure if phones have that capability and I take no responsibility for any damage to your phone if you get a powerful magnet too close.


=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

https://youtu.be/HI5ERdvroec

Intriguing demo in the link above. If you have access to an oscilloscope, it would be pretty interesting to analyse the output waveforms.

haha, I'm not sure I would trust some random anonymous youtuber named electricpete1

I tried to make that video as a straightforward demo of faraday's law.

To distinguish it from the multitude of other youtuber video's with permanent magnets whizzing by coils to light up LED's, I highlighted in the title there was no relative motion between the magnet and the coil.

Some youtubers apparently took that as an indication that I was somehow talking about free energy and I think my video got linked on some free energy (nutjob) websites and you can see some of the bizarre comments on the video.

I'm not complaining, the extra attention resulted in that video receiving far more views and comments than any other video I've ever made (almost half a million views). Far more than the boring video about force on iron vs conductor which has 2k views. Ironically that "boring" video is the far more interesting one to me although the video doesn't explain what's going on.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?

https://youtu.be/2FvWtEdY4sE

I also pretty much enjoyed your video on moving water with magnets. Wonder if you can use rotating magnetic fields to maybe, spin the water. I don't know if it's technically possible, but would be pretty interesting and entertaining for the YouTube audience and boost views.

Far more than the boring video about force on iron vs conductor which has 2k views.

It wasn't boring, but I guess the absence of a detailed explanation put off viewers. I suggest you remake the video with a detailed explanation of your demo which will definitely attract more views.

https://electricalspace.quora.com/Mitko-s-electrom...

A peculiar case of electromagnetic induction paradox. Please see above link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xFRtdN5IJA

There is no paradox in physics, only those who fail to understand it.

Quote ( )

I consider this as a revolutionary insight because in the course of time it will bring a completely new understanding of magnetism.

Yup. As soon as he understands how the magnetic field in each case is changing he will have a new understanding. The rest of us will wait for him to figure that out.

I'm with 3DDave on that. Not a surprising result at all. Draw the lines of flux and think about faraday's law (or if you must, think about flux cutting).

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?