Talk:Gramme machine

Magneto vs dynamo

I see some editing confusion here, mostly because the terminology is unclear to begin with.

• Magnetos typically use permanent magnets to generate the field
• Dynamos typically use electromagnets to generate the field

A magneto and a dynamo are therefore two separate devices, though using similar magnetic principles. DMahalko (talk) 22:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

'therefore'? Your use of the word 'typically' implies the field magnets are not defining characteristics. Perhaps dynamos are DC generators (many, especially the first ones, used permanent magnets) whereas magnetos produce AC pulses ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Description

I find the description section a bit confusing. As far as I understand, the permanent magnets are stationary, and it's rather the coils (which are attached to the ring) rotating around through the magnetic field than the other way round? And later on, shouldn't it be "interior parts of the windings" rather than "interior windings"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.187.247.177 (talk) 07:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Removing OR tag

The OR tag was added by someone but without any explanation why. The article is reasonably well referenced, so I am removing the OR tag. DMahalko (talk) 11:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Anchor ring

Often referred to as an anchor ring dynamo - presumably because early versions used a rotor core similar (in shape and possibly material) to the ring on a ships anchor - but are there any sources for this being the derivation for 'anchor ring' ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

The entire article is unclear.

The wiring connections in the diagrams can not be clearly traced to where they connect and nothing is labeled. It would probably clarify things if the drawings were updated at least to clearly indicate what the parts are. That leaves the reader guessing as to what the parts are. A textbook style analysis of the device with modern mathematical techniques could be useful as well. The traditional way of going about this would be to start by describing either Grammes original device or a typical industrial production device. Provide a clear picture and point out each component. Perhaps from a museum model. Then show a simplified diagram of it. From there you launch into the qualitative description with diagrams analogous to the ones in the text. The final diagram would be the same simplified diagram you showed earlier when you labeled all the parts. From there it could launch into a discussion of the electrodynamics of it as both a motor and a generator.

Thank you for your perceptive critique, it really helps to see how others see the article! I absolutely agree with you, the drawings in particular are inadequate. The main series of drawings omits the magnetic field lines, which are really necessary to understand how the current waveforms are induced. It probably wouldn't be too difficult to add them. I also agree a picture of an actual Gramme machine with the parts labeled would help.

I hope you don't mind, I moved your comment to the bottom of the page; that is where new topics should go (see WP:TALK). By the way, you can sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) after your text, which will cause Wikipedia to stick in your URL so others can see who made the comment. Cheers --Chetvorno^TALK 22:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)