5 ms·
> I reread the paragraph around it several times and still have no clue WTF they are trying to say. some advice: next time you don't understand some article, c
by DoctorOetker 2y ago
> I reread the paragraph around it several times and still have no clue WTF they are trying to say.
some advice: next time you don't understand some article, consider the possibility that it is not a case of:
> Yeah, that was some poor quality for IEEE. I'm pretty sure they confused "electromagnets" and "electromagnetism."
but that the problem might be your lack of understanding that you already detected. it's a press article, it can't teach you an undergraduate course in physics condensed to a few paragraphs of text...
- aidenn0 2y agoI have taken several undergraduate courses in physics. If you have some clue what they are saying with: > In some applications, these motors could offer an overall boost in efficiency ranging from 30 percent to close to 100 percent please illuminate. Brushless DC motors across a wide variety of applications already exceed 50% efficiency. Perhaps there are applications in which they cannot reach 50% efficiency, so a 100% boost in efficiency would be possible.
- eightysixfour 2y agoThe key is “in some applications.” Not in all applications. There are areas where brushless DC motors are inefficient, these are better in those areas - my guess is low speed, high torque use cases.
- aidenn0 2y agoA) that's the sort of thing I wish the article had mentioned. B) I know it's research, but low speed high torque situations usually involve a reduction gear-set. They make some surprisingly compact ones these days.
- eightysixfour 2y agoB) Yes, which involve losses and packaging changes. Exactly why a motor like this would be useful…