Joshua, Jow is way ahead of you
jan didden
Please, let's try and not confuse the OP.
I believe that the less various people give various explanations, it will be easier for the OP to grasp the issue and be clear about it.
So far, Waveborn is doing just fine.
Not bell-shaped, as bells flare out at the bottom but a rectified sine just carries on getting steeper until it hits zero.
However, this waveform is a good example of what we have been trying to explain. I don't know what else to say. If you can't see that this is AC and DC together, then maybe you need to find another hobby.
However, this waveform is a good example of what we have been trying to explain. I don't know what else to say. If you can't see that this is AC and DC together, then maybe you need to find another hobby.
No, I don't see it. I do understand his confusion, which I see as genuine. I sincerely wish he'll grasp the issue and be clear about it.
Now, if he is genuinely confused, I hope he'll get clear about it with the aid of participants here. It is my strong feeling that in case he is genuinely confused (though it may appear as a remote possibility to some of us), it's better to try and not increase his confusion (or his possible confusion).
Hmm...
When I studied electrical engineering at a regular university, they made sure we had enough mathematics to understand the concept of a rotating vector and the meaning of dv/dt before teaching AC circuits. For most of us that was 3 semesters of calculus and differential equations and physics. By the time AC circuits were introduced no one was confused about polarity.
Cheers,
Michael
LOL NOW I get it! It's not about physics at all; rather what do we call "AC" and what do we call "DC". Sorry I wasted my time...
When I studied electrical engineering at a regular university, they made sure we had enough mathematics to understand the concept of a rotating vector and the meaning of dv/dt before teaching AC circuits. For most of us that was 3 semesters of calculus and differential equations and physics. By the time AC circuits were introduced no one was confused about polarity.
Cheers,
Michael
LOL NOW I get it! It's not about physics at all; rather what do we call "AC" and what do we call "DC". Sorry I wasted my time...
Last edited:
I believe the OP has a better chance of getting it with the minimum amount of explanations, coming from only one, or maybe two people.
Most explanations here are true and valid, but it seems to me that many different explanations don't assist him to get it clearly.
Your statement is trying to equate current flowing in one direction, to a constant voltage. In a series DC circuit I can change the voltage reading between two resisters by altering either or both of the resisters to different values. We have changed the voltage with out change the current direction of flow.
I would need an explanation to wether it would be AC.
That half wave rectifier does not supply DC. The capacitors after it will flatten the AC enough to make it look like DC for all intents and purposes.
While the tube circuit changes the current it is the output transformer which converts this alternating current into alternating voltage. It really is that simple.
If you change the 2 resistors then there will be a difference in voltage. Because a resistor converts current into voltage. But the same resistors will give you the same voltage at the same current. Changing the current or the resistance will change the voltage. If this is seen over time as Sy has been trying to tell you then yes the change in voltage can be seen as AC.
In other words if you use a potmeter (variable resistor) in a "dc circuit" and you turn the potmeter all the time. You will generate AC.
Or if you change the current in the "dc circuit" and use an resistor as load. You will generate AC.
Last edited:
AC is Alternating Current. Period. That means, the Value of the Current is Alternating. Contrary to Constant. Constant is not Alternating. It is always the same, by definition. If it changes, it is not Constant anymore.
By the way, in different languages terms are less confusing. For example, in Russian we don't use "Direct Current" term. We use Constant Current term.
Where do you read "Polarity" in this simple logical definition?
By the way, in different languages terms are less confusing. For example, in Russian we don't use "Direct Current" term. We use Constant Current term.
Where do you read "Polarity" in this simple logical definition?
I didn't say it was. I simple stated that i disagree with you implying current flow in one direction must only be constant in voltage.
If you have two resisters in a DC series circuit and use a voltmeter to measure the voltage between the two resisters you see a voltage drop proportional to the resistance applied. This example is to show a voltage drop between the two resisters with out changing change the direction of current flow (polarity).
My advice is to form an International Consilium, and evaluate definitions.
Why? Because American definitions are good for business. For example, American Degrees were invented by Fahrenheit who designed commercial product for temperature measurement. European degrees were invented by Celsius who did physical experiments. Later, Kelvin made another scale, still using Celsius Degrees, and again, with physical properties in mind.
Let's start with Russian definitions. They are more scientific, so Russian engineers are better in scientific approach, while American engineers are better in commercial approach. That's why I dream of a team, where I design, and American engineers develop production. Want to join?
So, Russian term of what Americans call Direct Current, is Constant Current, or Stable Current. (Постоянный Ток).
Russian term of what Americans call Alternating Current, is Variable Current, or better Ever-Changing Current. (Переменный Ток)
What about other languages?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.