V.3 No 1

81

Several experiments studying dynamic magnetic field

4.1. Substantiation of experimental study

To check the fact of direct inductive interaction between the parallel elements of primary and secondary loops, we have studied the induction interaction between the elements of current of several primary loops and a single probe which we used in the previous experiment.

We based the technique on the principle shown in Fig. 15.

Fig. 15. Technique to study the inductive interaction of a single probe with the elements of several primary loops parallel to this probe

As we can see from Fig. 15, if we form the primary loop at the crossing of two loops whose input phase we can vary, then dependently on how we connect them, the resulting field in gap will be the sum either difference of two fields. In case of aiding connection (see Fig. 15 a), the fields are combined. So in accordance with the conventional treatment of induction process, the resulting induced emf has to be much more than at the anti-phase connection (see Fig. 15 b) at which the magnetic fields are subtracted.

As opposite to this conventional interpretation, if the inductive interaction occurs directly between the parallel elements of primary and secondary loops, the resulting inductive emf with aiding connection will be well less than with that anti-phase, because in this first case the induced emfs of oppositely directed currents of primary loops are subtracted, whilst in the second case the currents are in direction - this means, the emfs are added.

This peculiarity has to reflect on the phase diagram of inductive emf. As we saw in the previous experiment, when the single probe interacted with the loop (this related to the aiding connection of primary windings in the described technique), the phase of inductive emf has inverted in the central part of gap. But if the primary windings were connected in anti-phase, then in accordance with Fig. 15 b, such inversion of phase would not take place and the phase should remain constant in all the section of gap.

These basic differences in description of results of the process of induction in the considered scheme allow us to put in agreement unambiguously the phenomenology of process of inductive interaction with such or other description.