Added: 9 months ago
From: TheRealDealinlife
Views: 3,068
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (28)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • how to check the frictionless

  • I think you ruined your magnet, by the way..

  • @inverse2k1 Lol, I think I did but it was cool!

  • What are you trying to tell me? That I am under the age of 10 or crazy. Let me tell you something if you know how to put to and to together then you might just see a frictionless bearing. To let you know this was an experiment. What are you thing to tell me about this bearing? That it acts like a break.

  • @TheRealDealinlife

    Trying to say that you're under the age of 10 or crazy? Well, that's not exactly what I said.

    You seem to think you have to be one or the other, there is a third alternative.

    And as for the creating a break or not;

    As a matter of fact, yes. Yes I am trying to tell you that you've indeed built a break. Perhaps not a very efficient one, but a break non the less.

    One could even go so far as to say it's more of a break than it is a bearing. frictionless or otherwise.

  • @kasmackba O ok, Know I know what your thing is. I am going to tell you to do something. Go get a magnet that is N on the side and S on a side and a piece of aluminum,like the one in the video. And try it. Then take the magnet and put it in a aluminum tube.

  • @TheRealDealinlife

    You are refering to what is know and Eddy currents, also know as Foucault currents discovered by François Arago, and later explained by Michael Faraday.

    Been there, done that.

    Fact remains, the title, description and video narration is still inaccurate.

  • @kasmackba Yes.

    This is a frictionless. And can be use as a bearing. The bearing is there but the the rest of it is not.

  • @TheRealDealinlife

    A few posts back you recognized that this isn't a frictionless bearing.

    Now you've changed your mind again and claim it to be frictionless.

    In direct violation of physical reality I might add.

    By the process of elimination we have now concluded that you've got isses with distinguishing the physical reality which the rest of us occupy and your own delusional fantasy.

    So, which one are you; A child under the age of 10, or just a crazy person?

  • @kasmackba You have made a false statement!! I did not agree that this a friction bearing. For the beginning is was and still is frictionless. . By the way do not go in circles like a dog dog chasing his tail!!!

  • @TheRealDealinlife

    I have made no false statement what so ever.

    You claim that this is a frictionless bearing, yet you previously said, and I quote: "And as every one can see in this experiment it is not 100% frictionless." But now you've changed your mind again.

    Fact: If this device was frictionless when placed in a vacuum, it would spin for ever.

    However, the eddy currents are acting like a break, imparting FRICTION.

    Linear logic therefor dictates that this is NOT a frictionless bearing.

  • @kasmackba When I said That every one can see in this experiment it is not 100% frictionless is because it is hook up to the drill. If I could put it in a vacuum then that would be really cool.

  • @TheRealDealinlife

    Actually, it wouldn't be half as spectacular as your naivety would have you believe.

    If this device, sans the drill, was to be placed in a vacuum it would gradually slow down to a full stop.

    Now, why is that? The Eddy currents impart friction on the rotating element of the bearing. You'r failure to recognize this does not make this "bearing" frictionless.

    Rather it acts as an indication of your detatchment from reality. Making you sound like a crazy person.

  • @kasmackba Thank you for what you are to tell me, but To think about it and exercise it is to different things.

  • @kasmackba Your analysis is partly correct. Eddy current losses are not considered friction. He's right in saying it is friction-less - the key is that it isn't loss-less. Does that make sense? The other losses include windage (minor) and eddy currents (major). In a vacuum it'd just be the eddy currents.

    Point is that just taking away the friction has many benefits in industry provided it can be controlled. Active Magnetic Bearings do this quite well when the application is suitable.

  • @czebra

    Incorrect. Physics definition of friction: "A force that resists the relative motion or tendency to such motion of two bodies or substances in contact."

    And that is exactly what eddy current do. My analysis of the "bearing", from a physics point of view, is 100% correct. Not because *I* say so, but because science backed up by empirical evidence prooves it.

    Could it be that you're confusing the meaning of the word friction to be limited to physical contact?

    No cookie for you.

  • @kasmackba That's just blatantly wrong. Physics definition of friction? Read it: "two bodies or substances in contact."

    IN CONTACT

    Let's define contact, shall we? A quick Google search yields the following: "The state or condition of physical touching."

    You sir (or madam) are blatantly wrong. Get your definitions straight.

    Your analysis is sound, your definitions are wrong, that's what I was saying.

  • @kasmackba Let me add that there IS friction between the spinning surface and air... also known as windage. As I explain in another reply, at this scale it is small enough to be negligible and hence I did not consider it. So yeah you could say there is technically friction.

    But eddy current losses are not friction! They are a loss indeed, but not a friction loss.

  • @czebra Thanks for explaining that!!

  • @TheRealDealinlife Not a problem! What you're doing is a great way to learn about new things because it exposes you to new ideas and if you have some guidance from someone that knows a thing or two (in this case I can help out, but there are other areas where I am not knowledgeable but others are) then you can really understand what's going on.

    Keep on learning my friend! It's a wonderful thing!

  • @czebra in a vacuum or in space, it would be frictionless. Technically speaking though, you are correct, but I think that frictionless in this particular instance, simply means the lack of contact with a solid object.

  • @TheRealDealinlife Just so you know, there is no friction but other loss mechanisms exist. Also, if you're gonna use that drill... the drill itself will have friction within it so while your bearing is frictionless (but remember, not lossless) the system as a whole is not frictionless. kasmackba is kinda correct, but is getting some terms mixed up. (I work in the magnetic bearing industry so you can consider me a sort of expert on this subject)

  • @czebra Thanks. What if you did not consider the drill and its friction. Can you say that it is a frictionless bearing?

  • @TheRealDealinlife Technically, no.

    Let me explain: there is friction between the bearing and the air it is moving through. This is usually defined as "windage", but at its core it is still friction (contact between air and bearing surface). For your size bearing though the windage is likely so small as to be negligible (unless you get to REALLY high RPM).

    In a vacuum you would have created a frictionless bearing.

    Does that help? Hopefully I'm being clear.

  • This is not frictionless.

    If this truly was frictionless it would spin for infinity if placed in a vaccum.

    Energy is converted in separating the bearing halfs, and acting like a break.

    The laws of thermodynamics wins again.

    You should do some research into air bearings, they aren't frictionless, however their friction is far less than the contraption you've got there.

    Heck, chances are that a regular ABEC 9 bearing has less friction.

    I give you a C for effort, but F- for the theory.

  • @kasmackba You Better what out! One day you are going to tall some one that and it is going to come back and bit you. And as every one can see in this experiment it is not 100% frictionless.

  • @TheRealDealinlife

    Come back and bite me?That's rather unlikely.

    What i wrote is a representation of physical reality.

    The only people I know of who has a problem with physical reality are children under the age of 10 and crazy people, neither of which have the intellectual fortitude to offer a challenging response.

    One would also put in to question the bewildering choice of calling a non frictionless bearing frictionless.

    A statement which is resended when confronted with it's inaccuracy.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more