The power output of the acrylic and Teflon devices with rail were
similar at 410 W and 392 W, respectively, when vertical. They
have similar power output because the estimated damping force on
these devices is similar at 0.001 and 0.0008 N, respectively. Additionally,
the displacement of the levitating magnet is limited by the
box height, and therefore the power output is limited. The results
show that the acrylic device has slightly higher power output, but
and 70% higher power at 0.075 g. The use of Teflon versus acrylic has
a large effect at an angle because friction forces become stronger
due to the larger normal force. At the 30◦ angle in Fig. 7, the only
device that had some power output was the Teflon device because
the static friction could not be overcome by the excitation force in
both of the acrylic devices
The power output of the acrylic and Teflon devices with rail were
similar at 410 W and 392 W, respectively, when vertical. They
have similar power output because the estimated damping force on
these devices is similar at 0.001 and 0.0008 N, respectively. Additionally,
the displacement of the levitating magnet is limited by the
box height, and therefore the power output is limited. The results
show that the acrylic device has slightly higher power output, but
and 70% higher power at 0.075 g. The use of Teflon versus acrylic has
a large effect at an angle because friction forces become stronger
due to the larger normal force. At the 30◦ angle in Fig. 7, the only
device that had some power output was the Teflon device because
the static friction could not be overcome by the excitation force in
both of the acrylic devices
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..