Talk:Magnetic bearing
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Magnetic bearing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Electrodynamic bearing was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 6 August 2016 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Magnetic bearing. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Comment
editIf I put together a somewhat detailed engineering description on how an AMB works where should it go? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.80.95.243 (talk) 08:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Completing Electrodynamics bearing Merge
editI'm working to complete the elecrodynamic merge this weekend. If you have any questions about my edits. Please let me know or change them if something looks off. It's almost finished.I'm working to finish fact checking a few things, and a few minor points need to be integrated still. --Mikejones675 (talk) 23:43, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
- Is there any update on this? The topic is well outside my area of interest and it is currently the oldest afd merge. If no one is interested I will redirect it. @Mikejones675, Jergling, DGG, and CookieMonster755: AIRcorn (talk) 16:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- I have done a rough merge. Content will need checking. SilkTork (talk) 10:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Diamagnetic bearings
editI notice this article does not cover a relatively new type of magnetic bearing, the diamagnetic bearing. Using the diamagnetic effect, the Nijmegen High Field Magnet Laboratory are able to create bearings using the principle of Diamagnetically Stabilised Levitation. Should this be added under a new section in this article? --MadManMarkAu (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Go for it. Wizard191 (talk) 15:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)