My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[HuntingRoss]

Where this 'pulsing' actually becomes a short timed sweep from On-Off bisectors.

So it was stated recently that the output from these motors is AC.

My appraisal of the output was pulsed DC and your comment seems to suggest there is 'snap on' and 'snap off' for the pulse.

I wish I had a nifty scope to play with...maybe Santa will be good this year.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

So the magnetic interaction 'oscillates' between the ON and OFF angle...So is there frequency and harmonics here...Curious.

Happy Hunting

mark

Exactly Mark, and this precise oscillations could be read clearly from the output gates with a Scope (since no interference, no reversal, one single flow direction) when output is directly sync with Input.

The All North, single flow, no reversal Method, when running for a short while the whole Rotor core becomes all North polarized on outer circumference projecting towards stators...and South near shaft (inner), So all we are doing is 'pulsing' stronger north sections of core at the motoring energized coils interacting with stators. Where this 'pulsing' actually becomes a short timed sweep from On-Off bisectors.

I am glad you decided to open your own thread related to the single commutator development, and I wish you great luck with future experiments.


Sincerely


Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

So the magnetic interaction 'oscillates' between the ON and OFF angle...So is there frequency and harmonics here...Curious.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

Imperiall P56 Rotor Spec's

Hello to All,

@Mark Ross: Yes, if you say so, that is great Mark.

Now, keeping on...below are the Real Rotor Commutator Measurements Spec's from Imperial P 56:

[IMG][/IMG]

I believe this measurements could help us to understand the ratios from switching and magnetic interactions.

[IMG][/IMG]

Now, after making this five frames video, where I had to blend frames into each other over the track time...I realized that the closest Bisector Time from P2 C2 into Attraction to SSB, which I calculated around 9.325º...takes place in around 2º/Time, which is the 1º gap, plus 1º of ending contact to P2. After that "Flashing Point", it takes also another 2º more to make contact with P28, where the System Resets back to 5ºR/20ºA which is Frame Five like shown below:

[IMG][/IMG]

Concluding here that this closest points to the South Stator Bisector occurs at very, extremely short time intervals, to then "fly back" the next Coil Attraction Bisector (in this frame being P1,C2) to starting reset at 20º and so on...

This follows a constant "stepping forward and back" from All Sequential bisectors, increasing approach then retracting during operation...and, the faster motor is spinning the shorter this pulses would become.

Therefore, I believe we all should pay very close attention to this "variation" angle (which for this type of winding above is around 10º, rounding off) when setting timing on this Motor.


Regards to All



Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

There must be a collective sigh of relief around the forum to see that we now agree.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

Five Steps in Frames

STEP 1

[IMG][/IMG]

STEP 2

[IMG][/IMG]

STEP 3

[IMG][/IMG]

STEP 4

[IMG][/IMG]

STEP 5

[IMG][/IMG]

Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Five Steps Advance Angles Video...

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st6ygKoAzYY[/VIDEO]

IMPERIAL FIVE STEPS ADVANCING ANGLES

[HuntingRoss]

The Process is simple, so simple that without any formulas or equations, anyone seating in front of ANY Motor IN A REAL BUILD, could work it out very easy.

I know. I just look at the final bisector and count on two poles and see if this looks good or not...it takes a second to do.

This quote above we can absolutely agree on.

Chances are that the motor you're working with has a brush the same size as the comm segments.

When you're drafting your schematic, look at where P1 is just connecting then count two poles on from your last coil bisector to estimate your 'OFF' angle. If you're designing a single coil motor then the coil bisector 'is' your last bisector and so the same principle applies.

It really is that simple.

For motors where the brush is narrower than the comm segments, the final coil bisector will advance less than two poles.

Good Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

Found it.

The brushes on the Imperial are the width of 2 commutator segments... Not 1 comm segment.

A lot of Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

I shall revise the figures for the Imperial Pairs in RED below. Correcting the single comm width brush to 2 comm width as advised by UFO.

[IMG][/IMG]


Plugging in the angles for Pairs, P1 interaction only -

A = 5
B = 12.85
C = 12.85
D = ?
F = 51.4 (12.85 x 4)
NSB to SSB = 90

90 - 5 - 12.85 - 12.85 - 51.4 = 7.9°

---S---

And to calculate the 'OFF' angle for Pairs, P1 and P2 combined interaction -

G = The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P2 Coil 2 = 64.25 (12.85 x 5)

90 - A - C - G = D

90 - 5 - 12.85 - 64.25 = 7.9°

You can NOT just "decide" (because is your "preferred" option) to IGNORE the ENDING INDEPENDENT CIRCUIT BEING ENERGIZED IN DUE CYCLE

I can. Because ???...I accounted for it in the two different formula. 'G' is larger than 'F' by 12.85°. Because ???...P2 is ONE pole advanced from P1.

P2 is just a snapshot of P1 in the future...P1 will adopt that position in 12.85° time.

P1 is on the brush for probably 2° less than 25.7°. That's 1° gap plus 1° connection. But I shall ignore the detail for the purpose of illustration.

Every P from 1 to 28 is on the brush for 25.7°.

If P1 is on the brush by 1° it has 24.7° until disconnection. P2 has been on the brush for 13.85° and has 11.85° until disconnection.

It is the completely wrong method, not to consider BOTH CIRCUITS in an Equation to Calculate proper Interactions.

When you account for the total 'time on brush' for one comm segment it works just fine...every time.

So, Mark...Now that you have all the Right and Real Measurements from Imperial ...Go ahead, use your correct equation now..the one specifically designed for Pairs ...and see if it even comes up close to 20º.

I have to say, I don't like the look of 7.9° as the 'OFF' angle. But it probably works OK.

The Process is simple, so simple that without any formulas or equations, anyone seating in front of ANY Motor IN A REAL BUILD, could work it out very easy.

I know. I just look at the final bisector and count on two poles and see if this looks good or not...it takes a second to do.

I will do put together the Right Equation...in time.

You're correct. There is one equation that fits all motors. But it will have some variables in it. So far it has been simple addition or subtraction.

...and that "final bisector" underlined in your statement above three (3) times, is the one that dictates if or not your design will work out successfully...

Correct.

...which, according to your "preference" you ignore in your equations...

Incorrect.
Accounted for in both formula.

There you are!...You only consider for your "specific designed formula" applicable to "Pairs Only"..."F" as The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P1 Coil 2 is 120º...Ignoring P2 "final bisector" from Coil 2 as you have written above, just because the one who dictates the 50 percent possibility of error by a 30º Margin Angle is that "final bisector"...and that is a BIG TIME ERROR guy!...

Incorrect.
For P1 just connecting and 120º (crudely) it has 60º on the brush.
For P1 just connecting and 150º (crudely) P2 has just 30º left on the brush.
See. Accounted for.

...but be aware of many targets out there which are not an easy piece to shut down...

What does that even mean.

Like I have said before. The 4 pole pairs wind seems to be problematic because it just spans across too many poles between the magnet bisectors.


Deliriously Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

If we consider only the P1 interaction (my preferred option) then a single coil has one bisector which advances towards the SSB described by the addition of Comm + Brush angle.

You can NOT just "decide" (because is your "preferred" option) to IGNORE the ENDING INDEPENDENT CIRCUIT BEING ENERGIZED IN DUE CYCLE(and I write "Circuit" as a General Term, because it Includes ALL Type of Coils, Single, Pairs or Groups)

The Ending Circuit is required at all times (IN ALL TYPE OF WINDINGS) because this is ALL about A SEQUENTIAL-ROTATIONAL ORDER that takes place in Time and Space during OPERATION.

Remember this are ALL ROTARY MACHINES....so what goes around...comes around...

If it is about Single Coils, You MUST include in the Calculations C1 AND C2, because they DO get connected SIMULTANEOUSLY in this type of Motors in a 50% of TIME-SPACE AT EACH 360º TURN for Two Stators...AND TWICE in 360º Turn for Four Stators during Machine Operation.

If we consider only the P1 interaction for a Pair or Group wind the final coil bisector is closer to the SSB before we consider the amount it advances from Comm + Brush. Hence the angle between the first and last coil is added to the equation.

It's all been described in words and drawing.

It is the completely wrong method, not to consider BOTH CIRCUITS in an Equation to Calculate proper Interactions.

Actually, C2, P2 or G2 are the FINAL DICTATING Coils that tell Us, IF or NOT We are correct before proceeding to wind THE ROTOR, in ANY KIND of Winding Displayed on this Thread.

Simply ignoring this FACT above, will lead in the construction of a completely unusable Machine, that would never perform as expected.

Sounds familiar Mark?

I thought it was a typo which is why I corrected it. Without looking for the #post on the subject, from memory you remarked the Imperial brush is the width of one of the 56 comm segments and two segments are tied together...From memory.

Your Memory is failing to recall that I corrected that fact in a previous post here.

Imperial Commutator is based on 56 segments and 28 Rotor Poles. The Brush Angle in Imperial is equal to Two Segments Angle.

Since the first Imperial here was ever wound, We used two commutator segments bridged to one circuit. This way is a 1:1 Switch Ratio.

I know it must be around 20º. What I'm trying to ascertain from a crude method of measurement is what it really is.

So, Mark...Now that you have all the Right and Real Measurements from Imperial ...Go ahead, use your correct equation now..the one specifically designed for Pairs ...and see if it even comes up close to 20º..

Why not just tell me (all of us) how you would work it out ?

The Process is simple, so simple that without any formulas or equations, anyone seating in front of ANY Motor IN A REAL BUILD, could work it out very easy.

Just go through all the Members on this Thread that have done very successful asymmetric machines of many different structures without any previous existing "formulas".

Just look at Richard Bates (Midaz)...This guy obviously have no access to any CAD Software, besides he has no idea how to even start drawing a circle without the assistance of a round cup...He tries to avoid any conversation involving Math or Geometry Calculations ...However, He has built an Imperial in two windings methods by now...and they work...He even came up with his own idea...poor idea, but he made it run.

I will do put together the Right Equation...in time.

But first, I want to erase from everyone's mind here all the Confusion You have created and spread with your wrong assumptions, your wrong preferred methods and presumptions... mixing switching angles with magnetic interactions back and forth.

It's not simply a function of stators or brushes.

Oh, they are simple functions!...is just about to define a way to see them all in easier planes...for example...just by taking all this Angular Rotations into linear graphics movements simplifies this process even more. Rotations tend to confusions, basically not being able to distinguish between a smaller wheel like a Commutator, within a larger wheel of a Rotor, even though BOTH having the same exact, identical angles, and taking place within the same Time and Space...having both RADICAL traveling Distances differences...I know You are one who can not distinguish this fact properly.

The Pairs and Groups 'reach out' to the SSB...in effect bringing it closer. It stands to reason that if the final bisector is wound further towards the SSB without considering the 'time on brush', then the final bisector can reach the SSB whilst still energised. If the final bisector was 30º from the SSB when its comm segment has just connected and it had 30º to travel before disconnecting...Then we have a problem with the design.

Right Mark, and that "final bisector" underlined in your statement above three (3) times, is the one that dictates if or not your design will work out successfully...And that "final bisector" is defined in a 50% of whole rotation by the C2, P2 and G2 Circuits...which, according to your "preference" you ignore in your equations...meaning..."standing out of your reason"...

The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P1 Coil 2 is 120º.
The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P2 Coil 2 is 150º.

Still Happily Hunting

mark

There you are!...You only consider for your "specific designed formula" applicable to "Pairs Only"..."F" as The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P1 Coil 2 is 120º...Ignoring P2 "final bisector" from Coil 2 as you have written above, just because the one who dictates the 50 percent possibility of error by a 30º Margin Angle is that "final bisector"...and that is a BIG TIME ERROR guy!...Basically in such small sized rotor number of poles like the only ones you have worked on...the 12 poles.

I thought it was a "typo"...now you confirmed your serious mistake.

The more you write here...the more convinced I am as of why all your 'beasts' never performed as expected, completely opposite results to hundreds of successful replications that have being taking place for over two years on this Thread.


Keep hunting...but be aware of many targets out there which are not an easy piece to shut down...


Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

So, Now We should use a "specific" equation for "Single Coils" and another one for Pairs?...come on, man...are you real?

This is extremely funny now!

Why so?

If we consider only the P1 interaction (my preferred option) then a single coil has one bisector which advances towards the SSB described by the addition of Comm + Brush angle.

If we consider only the P1 interaction for a Pair or Group wind the final coil bisector is closer to the SSB before we consider the amount it advances from Comm + Brush. Hence the angle between the first and last coil is added to the equation.

It's all been described in words and drawing.

Mark, now are you gonna tell me what the Imperial(S) seating at my bench measurements are?

I thought it was a typo which is why I corrected it. Without looking for the #post on the subject, from memory you remarked the Imperial brush is the width of one of the 56 comm segments and two segments are tied together...From memory.

D MUST BE around 20º

I know it must be around 20º. What I'm trying to ascertain from a crude method of measurement is what it really is.

Why not just tell me (all of us) how you would work it out ?

THERE MUST BE JUST ONE EQUATION THAT FITS ALL MOTORS, NO MATTER IF TWO STATORS, FOUR STATORS AND NO MATTER IF FOUR OR TWO BRUSHES.

It's not simply a function of stators or brushes. The Pairs and Groups 'reach out' to the SSB...in effect bringing it closer. It stands to reason that if the final bisector is wound further towards the SSB without considering the 'time on brush', then the final bisector can reach the SSB whilst still energised. If the final bisector was 30º from the SSB when its comm segment has just connected and it had 30º to travel before disconnecting...Then we have a problem with the design.

Look at your calculation for your 12 pole 4 Pole Coils in the Pair...you have F=120º....when it is 150º

5X30=150º

The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P1 Coil 2 is 120º.
The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P2 Coil 2 is 150º.

Still Happily Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

So Mark, I don't think I see the above calculation highlighted in purple applying to the dual coil group for the 12 pole, done for the 10 pole. I know it only has the single coil. But I guess this type of calculation can prove that a coil will not be improperly energized past the top dead center of any magnet sector bisector. I think I can make the substitutions to get that calculation, but just thought I'd ask for now... I guess the 4-pole coil doesn't have this problem you show for the 12-pole?

Sam

Hi Sam

The equations you quoted from a section of my post are for PAIRS only so you're correct, it will not apply to your single coil wind.

For a single coil wind you should use the following -

I present the 10 pole 4 stator commutator / brush angles for everyones consideration.

The method I prefer is to consider the 'time on brush' for one comm segment from 1° 'ON' to 0° 'OFF'.

For a single coil as we have been discussing in the recent past I would estimate it as so :

A = 'ON' angle
B = The angle of the comm segment
C = The angle of the brush
D = 'OFF' angle
E = The angle between P1 and P2 coil bisectors
The NSB and SSB stator bisectors are 90°

Where B + C = 'Time on brush'

Such that the 'OFF' angle of your proposed design (which must be a positive number variable around 20°) is -

Considering P1 interaction only

90 - A - B - C = D

Crudely stating the comm segment as 36° and the brush as 27° and given an 'ON' angle of 8°, then

90 - 8 - 36 - 27 = 19°

More accurately from the image

90 - 8 - 61 = 21° (B + C = 61°)


To estimate the 'OFF' angle by reference to P1 and P2 combined together for single coils :

90 - A - C - E = D

Once again, to crudely estimate

90 - 8 - 27 - 36 = 19°

And with more accuracy

90 - 8 - 25* - 36 = 21° (* The brush angle is reduced to account for the comm segment gap of 1° plus 1° connection)

For Groups the equation for P1 interaction only would be, where
F = The angle between the first and last coil bisectors and
G = The angle between the NSB and SSB

G - A - B - C - F = D


Happy Hunting

mark[/QUOTE]

[Ufopolitics]

[IMG][/IMG]

@ UFO

Unfortunately you used the equation for a single coil to estimate the Imperial Pairs wind...

Mark,

So, Now We should use a "specific" equation for "Single Coils" and another one for Pairs?...come on, man...are you real?

This is extremely funny now!

Why so?

We have exactly same parameters same angles, same Two Bisectors dictating the Magnetic Interaction Angle??

and you took the brush angle as 13° when it is half that 6.5°

Mark, now are you gonna tell me what the Imperial(S) seating at my bench measurements are?

Those are REAL Measurements Mark.

Forget what the diagram looks like...am giving the REAL VALUES ABOVE.

You also said the answer derived from the equation was wrong without saying why or what it should be.

You are not reading well and slow enough Mark, it is there...It is as well on Diagram

D MUST BE around 20º

Everything below are the wrong measurements, therefore wrong results

Plugging in the angles for Pairs, P1 interaction only -

A = 5
B = 12.85
C = 6.43 (12.85 / 2)
D = ?
F = 51.4 (12.85 x 4)
NSB to SSB = 90

90 - 5 - 12.85 - 6.42 - 51.4 = 14.33°

---S---

And to calculate the 'OFF' angle for Pairs, P1 and P2 combined interaction -

G = The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P2 Coil 2 = 64.25 (12.85 x 5)

90 - A - C - G = D

90 - 5 - 6.42 - 64.25 = 14.33°

---S---

So the coils are off before they approach the SSB. The designer has to make a value judgment on whether that is too close (or not) to the SSB.

Exuberantly Hunting

mark

THERE MUST BE JUST ONE EQUATION THAT FITS ALL MOTORS, NO MATTER IF TWO STATORS, FOUR STATORS AND NO MATTER IF FOUR OR TWO BRUSHES.

That is the perfect Equation Guy!

Now you are "pulling out of your sleeve a "G" Parameter?

What is the difference between "F" and "G" ?...Both are based two guiding/dictating bisectors...

Get your numbers set together and well Mark...


Look at your calculation for your 12 pole 4 Pole Coils in the Pair...you have F=120º....when it is 150º

5X30=150º


Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

To extend my 'flawed' method of estimation (notwithstanding the same outcome, just luck I suppose) to the 12 pole 4 pole pairs wind -

A = 'ON' angle
B = The angle of the comm segment
C = The angle of the brush
D = 'OFF' angle
F = The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P1 Coil 2 bisectors
The NSB and SSB stator bisectors are 180°

180 - A - B - C - F = D

Crudely

180 - 5 - 30 - 30 - 120 = -5°

More accurately

180 - 5 - 57 - 120 = -2°

The negative number denotes the coils remained energised past the SSB when they should disengage prior to the SSB.

[IMG][/IMG]

@ UFO

Unfortunately you used the equation for a single coil to estimate the Imperial Pairs wind...and you took the brush angle as 13° when it is half that 6.5°

You also said the answer derived from the equation was wrong without saying why or what it should be.

Plugging in the angles for Pairs, P1 interaction only -

A = 5
B = 12.85
C = 6.43 (12.85 / 2)
D = ?
F = 51.4 (12.85 x 4)
NSB to SSB = 90

90 - 5 - 12.85 - 6.42 - 51.4 = 14.33°

---S---

And to calculate the 'OFF' angle for Pairs, P1 and P2 combined interaction -

G = The angle between P1 Coil 1 and P2 Coil 2 = 64.25 (12.85 x 5)

90 - A - C - G = D

90 - 5 - 6.42 - 64.25 = 14.33°

---S---

So the coils are off before they approach the SSB. The designer has to make a value judgment on whether that is too close (or not) to the SSB.

Exuberantly Hunting

mark