My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[HuntingRoss]

From the following post. Comm segment is 36º and brush width is 27º. Stator bisector is 90º.

Ten (10) pole rotor, Ten (10) commutator segments and Four (4) Stators analysis.

Based on Single Coils wound by four poles each and overlapped as I have proposed before, he had 36º from C1 Bisector to C2 Bisector...and the same between C6 and C7 apart at 180º.

[IMG][/IMG]

I am starting to Fire C1-C6 Bisectors EXACTLY AT 8º Angle away from North Stators Bisectors. Which means C2-C7 Bisectors are located at 46º [8º+36º=44º-90º=46º] away from South Bisector (this residual angle not shown on Diagram)

[IMG][/IMG]

Notice the C2 bisector is 46° away from the south bisector when C1 fires at 8° !

The rotor has to advance 27° to disconnect C2 !... 46° - 27° = 19°

Your 'ON' angle is 8°
Your 'OFF' angle is 21°
Your MIA as you're calling it is 36°

This means your diagram only advanced 25° when the brush is 27°. I would have made the 'OFF' angle 19°. But I'm not disagreeing with the principle by which you arrived at these figures. It is what I've been saying all along.

The other way I have been looking at it is this.
The 'ON' angle is 8°
The 'ON' comm segment has to advance 36° (its face width) + 27° (the face width of the brush) giving an 'OFF' angle of 19° (90 - 8 - 36 - 27)

90° (Stator bisector) - 8° (ON angle) - 21° (OFF angle) - 36° (coil bisectors or MIA) = 25°

This is how far the rotor advances in the diagram, but it should have been 27° which is the brush width.

Just process the information given.

I have been repeatedly told this is incorrect yet it always delivers the correct 'OFF' angle. This isn't coincidence. It's first grade geometry.

This is how you can ESTIMATE the timing of your design PRIOR to winding.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

[IMG][/IMG]

Note on the Four Pole Coils Diagram above...the Angle between both 'Circuits' being fired, are reduced now from 85º previously to 36º...meaning, you could get further away from North (less repulse) and still not passing the South Stator Bisector...

Now, the "Perfect Neutral" position for this case would be setting the 36º exactly in the center of 90º angle from stators...right?...and that would be 90-36=54/2=27º...meaning you would start firing exactly 27º away from North of C1 and 27º closer to South Stator Bisector of C2.

So, firing closer C2 Bisector to the Attract South Stator Bisector, say at 20º...would set your repulse at 34º right?

Concluding here...I believe your sweet spot should be from that Neutral spot towards closing the gap to the Attract Stator...As I am sure that in higher percentage of attract mode, your motor amps would start dropping real low.

[...]

So the 'sweet spot' should be found when the C1 bisector is between 27º and 34º from the north stator bisector. Does anyone want to ESTIMATE where the C2 bisector 'OFF' angle is ? OK, I'll do it.

It is between 27º (ON angle) + 36º (Magnetic Interaction Angle) + 27º (brush angle) = 90º past the North Stator Bisector
And 34º (ON angle) + 36º (Magnetic Interaction Angle) + 27º (brush angle) = 97º past the North Stator Bisector

And here's a clue. The South Stator Bisector is 90º past the North Stator Bisector.

---S---

Good Hunting

mark

Mark,

I will just RE-QUOTE BELOW the ONLY PART I keep getting from you...No matter how many times I Insist You do NOT Add Switch Angle from Brush/Segment to Magnetic Interaction Sweep...JUST BECAUSE, THEY COEXIST, ROTATE, MOVE, TURN WITHIN THE SAME EXACT TIME/SPACE...Then You tell me I am "misrepresenting what you're saying!!!

It is between 27º (ON angle) + 36º (Magnetic Interaction Angle) + 27º (brush angle) = 90º

Regardless, you keep adding this "brush angle" to Magnetic Interaction Angle,which happens to take place right WITHIN THOSE 36 DEGREES!!
...are you for real man?...

Let me guess...did you even see my previous post? did you read that?...am sure you did NOT...or maybe you did not understand it?


And, here I am ending my discussion with you Mark related if you do add or you don't...finished....We were supposed to end this argument way before getting again on the same boat.

I realize I am completely wasting my time every second I spent writing to you...

You have been so far the more stubborn person, that I have EVER dealt with...and the glass is full.

It is time for others to build and show...over

Now "transfer" all of your posted arguments with me here...and take them to your close friend Midaz the Hijacker of this Thread...like you have been doing lately...adding more fuel to the fire..

ASK ME IF I GIVE A "WHO"?

And last...If You have any Machines, which are based on a SINGLE COMMUTATOR...AM ASKING NOT TO EXPOSE RESULTS HERE...

[HuntingRoss]

I also conclude that we still do not agree on the basis for estimating the 'OFF' times for motor design being you have not responded to my last post on the topic.

No We don't have it...now you came up that those 2º left over for timing on Sampojo model were considering the 20º established on the Off Timing ...not mentioned at that time, but now.

How could we just "GUESS" your ways of displaying your words?

No need to guess. It was mentioned at the time...

That means your connected comm has to sweep approximately 36 + 27 = 63º from connection to disconnection. Working with a combined 'ideal ON / OFF' angle of 25º, gives you 88º. Thats leaves 2º for timing adjustments.

Working with a combined 'ideal ON / OFF' angle of 25º.

It should have been written as 22º left to do timing!...not just "2º"
It tends to Confusion not to mention the 20º...those two degrees left sets ALL Calculations in the ridiculous side...meaning not good.

I accept from the tone of your response that it was not written to your liking. But it was written. More than that, you could have inquired how the 25º was divided between 'ON' and 'OFF'. But you didn't.

The 20º OFF limit was established as an approximated convention, not meaning it could NOT be less or it could NOT be more. However, any TOTAL Angles left between last coil bisector to South Stator Bisector MUST BE mentioned at all times!

The 20º OFF limit is mainly DICTATED by speed and voltage applied as the structure type of each different Machine, so it is understood it is NOT A GENERAL RULE!.

I accept that it is not written in tablets of stone, that it is approximate. You should have noted that I have always stated that my method for calculating the 'OFF' time is an ESTIMATE...an approximation to enable the 'would be' designer a guide to setting the initial timing before winding the motor.

Despite the fact that the 'OFF' angle is an approximation, I didn't think we would want to actively fine tune the motor in that zone.

Notwithstanding, if this confused anyone...Apologies. It was unintentional.

On a better point. It can be seen (or it should have been noted) that my method of calculating the timing for the 10 pole motor agrees with UFO's method of calculating and achieves the same result. It seems futile to avoid agreement when the methods of calculation all point to agreement.

If we want to illustrate 'confusion', consider the following quote -

[IMG][/IMG]

Now, the "Perfect Neutral" position for this case would be setting the 36º exactly in the center of 90º angle from stators...right?...and that would be 90-36=54/2=27º...meaning you would start firing exactly 27º away from North of C1 and 27º closer to South Stator Bisector of C2.

So, firing closer C2 Bisector to the Attract South Stator Bisector, say at 20º...would set your repulse at 34º right?

Concluding here...I believe your sweet spot should be from that Neutral spot towards closing the gap to the Attract Stator...As I am sure that in higher percentage of attract mode, your motor amps would start dropping real low.

So the 'sweet spot' should be found when the C1 bisector is between 27º and 34º from the north stator bisector. Does anyone want to ESTIMATE where the C2 bisector 'OFF' angle is ? OK, I'll do it.

It is between 27º (ON angle) + 36º (Magnetic Interaction Angle) + 27º (brush angle) = 90º past the North Stator Bisector
And 34º (ON angle) + 36º (Magnetic Interaction Angle) + 27º (brush angle) = 97º past the North Stator Bisector

And here's a clue. The South Stator Bisector is 90º past the North Stator Bisector.

---S---

But I shall be clear. This discussion is not about the 10 pole motor. It never was. It is about the 12 pole 4 pole Pairs motor.

What is NOT "basic Science principles" is that even being warned by many here, mainly from me about the wrong settings on your timing angles, by keeping ON the leaving coil passing south bisector...you STILL proceeded to test this known to be failed tests...and then post results which made look "your beast" as a very weak machine.

Once again inferring that the incorrect timing of my 4 pole pairs motor was correctable...IF ONLY I'D LISTENED...but alas by the time this all reared its ugly head so many weeks and months later, I knew more about the subject. Specifically the 12 pole 4 pole Pairs motor is uncorrectable...It can never be timed correctly.

For those that have not followed the explanations so far -

The 'OFF' angle for the second coil of P1 is 5º (ON angle) + 120º (magnetic interaction angle) + 57º (time on the brush) = 182º past the north stator bisector. Which is 22º past our APPROXIMATE 'OFF' limit and 2º past the south stator bisector.

Good Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

Simple Geometry Applied to Asymmetric Motors

Hello to All,

This Post is related to previous debates about sweeping angles between Switching Area versus Magnetic Interaction Angles...since it seems there are still confusion about it...

A while back Veproject1 open a Thread called "The Two Circles Paradox"

The main video was "Aristotle's wheel paradox"

The solution was simple...however, many could not see where was the confusing concept.

The same exact thing applies to the way we "see" a Commutator Switch level circle and Brush, versus a Magnetic Interaction level circle which is always bigger.

Previously, on the Five Film Strips I have uploaded (shown below), We agreed that Commutator Segment sweeps TWICE its Circumference Size related to the Brush size, meaning the Coil being energized (ON) for twice the commutator arc segment circumference...

[IMG][/IMG]

However, this fact, when we compare same Angle to a larger Radius Rotor ...things "change".

So, I put together this Diagrams with "Circles Paradoxes" related to Commutator/Brush Angles, versus Rotor Coils/Stators Angles:

[IMG][/IMG]

On Part 1 above, Left Image, is shown the simple way we calculate an Arc Segment (s) based on Radius (r) and given Angle Theta.
On Right Image, we see the same application for a Motor where Commutator/Rotor Ratio is 1:2, so Commutator is r=1" and Rotor is r=2"
Then a Rotor Pole Arc (s2) would be TWICE the Commutator Arc (s1)

Then we have Part 2 Diagram:

[IMG][/IMG]

On Right Image above we see a Four Pole Coil...of Arc Segment s3, which is greater than, Eight Times the size of the Arc Circumference from Commutator Segment.

I displayed "greater than" and not "equal to" sign, because we must add here the slot gap distance between each pole.

Which means that...No matter if a Brush of the same face/size as comm. segment, takes TWICE that sweep angle at ON Time at Commutator Circle Level...That Time ON only means One Eight (1/8) of the Total Magnetic Interaction Sweeping Angle taking place at that Four Pole Coil.

I have written here previously that ALWAYS a Commutator Radius will be Smaller than Rotor Radius...it is an established operating equation that applies to Symmetry and Asymmetry whenever designing motors.

Therefore, the Angles established at Switch/Commutator/Brush Segments would always take MUCH LESS TIME than the Time of each Magnetic Interaction angle takes to fully develop from that Switch ON-OFF sweep angle/time.

If we go by Bisectors on this example...then, Bisector from that Coil would be set greater than (>) Four (4) Times the Commutator/Brush segment sweeping area.

Setting the ON-OFF Time to be s2= 0.35 travel distance (which is TWICE the size of comm. segment based on Diagram= 0.175)...And Bisector being 4 times s1, or (0.175 X 4)= 0.7 which is exactly TWICE the ON-OFF distance traveled.




Regards



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

But that's the funny thing UFO. You see my exploits as 'constant personal failure' whilst I see my knowledge and experience growing in a new discipline. As the well known phrase goes, that's a hundred ways not to make a light bulb. The world would be a darker place if people were so easily discouraged by such negative comments.

You appear to be sensitive to my comment about the single comm. I make no claims that it is better or worse than double comm, simply the conclusion that was drawn was not derived from the question that preceded it. That is basic science principles.

Mark,

What is NOT "basic Science principles" is that even being warned by many here, mainly from me about the wrong settings on your timing angles, by keeping ON the leaving coil passing south bisector...you STILL proceeded to test this known to be failed tests...and then post results which made look "your beast" as a very weak machine.

But what I have said about the single comm build is this. It is a very simple way for novice builders to get into a new subject and learn without the added technical issues of chopping and joining the motors which experienced builders would be more comfortable tackling.

The Single Commutator would never, ever could be compared to dual commutator machines.
Single Commutator represents Symmetry, Dual Commutator represents Asymmetry...Night and Day difference!
In the very beginning of this Thread a member built the single comm three poles...at that time there were all the differences established between both types.

I also conclude that we still do not agree on the basis for estimating the 'OFF' times for motor design being you have not responded to my last post on the topic.

Happy Hunting

mark

No We don't have it...now you came up that those 2º left over for timing on Sampojo model were considering the 20º established on the Off Timing ...not mentioned at that time, but now.

How could we just "GUESS" your ways of displaying your words?

It should have been written as 22º left to do timing!...not just "2º"
It tends to Confusion not to mention the 20º...those two degrees left sets ALL Calculations in the ridiculous side...meaning not good.

The 20º OFF limit was established as an approximated convention, not meaning it could NOT be less or it could NOT be more. However, any TOTAL Angles left between last coil bisector to South Stator Bisector MUST BE mentioned at all times!

The 20º OFF limit is mainly DICTATED by speed and voltage applied as the structure type of each different Machine, so it is understood it is NOT A GENERAL RULE!.



Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

Just because of your constant personal failures on dual commutator machines...does not need to be "extended" into "General Comments" like above Mark.

But that's the funny thing UFO. You see my exploits as 'constant personal failure' whilst I see my knowledge and experience growing in a new discipline. As the well known phrase goes, that's a hundred ways not to make a light bulb. The world would be a darker place if people were so easily discouraged by such negative comments.

You appear to be sensitive to my comment about the single comm. I make no claims that it is better or worse than double comm, simply the conclusion that was drawn was not derived from the question that preceded it. That is basic science principles.

But what I have said about the single comm build is this. It is a very simple way for novice builders to get into a new subject and learn without the added technical issues of chopping and joining the motors which experienced builders would be more comfortable tackling.

I also conclude that we still do not agree on the basis for estimating the 'OFF' times for motor design being you have not responded to my last post on the topic.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

@UFOPolitics
My question is does the electricity that is being fed to the motor coils begin to flow the millisecond that the brush touches the commutator element? This violates most electricity laws. Electricity always takes the path of least resistance. I do not think that there will be a very long period where two neighboring commutator elements will be energized simultaneously with the exact same amount of resistance between the coils brushes and wires leading into them. Just food for thought.

Cheers

Garry

Garry, you definitively have a good point there.

And if we add the mechanical bouncing of a spring mounted brush...at every air gap...then we start complicating the "scenario" even more...

What I have done before and had excellent results is to install a 1K resistor from segment to segment...this, besides reducing sparking/arcing a lot...if we add them just at bottom commutator the output voltage increases quite some...

So far the "Clean CAD's" Diagrams could never predict the actual issues found in every real development...

We are working from neat and clean theories when it comes to designs...then find the unpredicted results from reality.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[GChilders]

Does electricity start to flow when brush initially touches com element?

@UFOPolitics
My question is does the electricity that is being fed to the motor coils begin to flow the millisecond that the brush touches the commutator element? This violates most electricity laws. Electricity always takes the path of least resistance. I do not think that there will be a very long period where two neighboring commutator elements will be energized simultaneously with the exact same amount of resistance between the coils brushes and wires leading into them. Just food for thought.

Cheers

Garry

[Ufopolitics]

Is this Confusion?...or else?

ah yeah, your right, i didnt take into account the end of the wind, is still up top, on the single comm. doh.

ok, thats settled then, lol, dual comm is superior

With respect grounded, all this proves is single comm can't do all north.

Happy Hunting

mark

Negative Mark,

Dual Commutator Machines has been proven to be FAR superior to ANY single commutator designs, no matter how far you get into "trying" to make them better.

Just because of your constant personal failures on dual commutator machines...does not need to be "extended" into "General Comments" like above Mark.

Single Commutator KILLS by reversing polarity in every turn the collapsing field Radiant that tries to enter the system...this has been long time ago discussed/debated in my First Thread here.

Dual Commutator Machines generates a "One Way Flow" within rotating fields...this has long, very long implications that range from flux flows to electrical fields flow...besides no constant colliding of electrons/flux like a Single, old commutator does.

This effects can NEVER be reproduced with a Single Comm deal.



Ufopolitics

[jeffy39]

pers. msg

@ JC4me : have you checked your P M's lately?
jw

[HuntingRoss]

Can you explain this? "And given the 5 frame agreement that a comm sweeps over a brush with an angle equal to twice its face width".

Hi Zardox

UFO posted in response to Jeffy, the following -

[IMG][/IMG]

For a comm segment / brush ratio of 1:1 the 'time on brush' is 2 x the face width of the comm segment. In that example it was 20°.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Zardox]

Mark

Can you explain this? "And given the 5 frame agreement that a comm sweeps over a brush with an angle equal to twice its face width".
Its early for me but I'm just not following.

[padova]

@Padova,

Don't waste your time with this people!

Did you see who responded?...Midaz the Hijacker...

And now he has nothing else to do but to repost it on his boring promises thread...

@Midaz: Go Hijacker do your piece of crap...with single coils...did you made up your mind between 5 or 6 yet?

Thanks UFO.
I saw it.
Well what we can do. I am quite busy. I have to finish some things.
I have no time.

regards

[HuntingRoss]

I am going to focus this Post on Sampojo Ten (10) pole rotor, Ten (10) commutator segments and Four (4) Stators analysis.

Hi UFO

A couple of points, but first I can say we are very close to agreement after your couple of posts.

Your 'ON' angle is 8°
Your 'OFF' angle is 21°
Your MIA as you're calling it is 36°

This means your diagram only advanced 25° when the brush is 27°. I would have made the 'OFF' angle 19°. But I'm not disagreeing with the principle by which you arrived at these figures. It is what I've been saying all along.

The other way I have been looking at it is this.
The 'ON' angle is 8°
The 'ON' comm segment has to advance 36° (its face width) + 27° (the face width of the brush) giving an 'OFF' angle of 19° (90 - 8 - 36 - 27)

Now. The reason I said 2° for timing is, I assumed the search for the 'sweet spot' was not within the 20° 'cease fire' zone. Which left 2° for advancing and less than 3° for retarding, being I was firing at 5°. If this presumption is incorrect, then we have this pretty much wrapped up.

Which makes this bit really easy. For a 12 pole 4 pole pair wind, with the P1 Coil 1 bisector at 5°. And given the 5 frame agreement that a comm sweeps over a brush with an angle equal to twice its face width. Then the P1 comm from 1° connected to 0° disconnected is 59°. The P1 Coil 2 bisector has just gone 'OFF' at 184° past the north stator bisector. Which I think we can now agree is WRONG.

Oh. And to tidy up the 25° query you made in my post. It is the ideal 'ON' angle of 5° plus the ideal 'OFF' angle 20°.

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

@Mark
After examining Post #7650 where UFO goes over the two new windings for the Imperial motor I am confused. He shows two coil bisectors for the two coils that are wound. I was under the impression that even though there are two coils being energized at one time that it still resulted in one magnetic field being produced and that the center of this magnetic field was in the center of both pairs....

Perhaps I am mistaken in my understanding of the influence of the coils. If so I apologize.

Apology accepted Gary.

UFO has confirmed in the next post that there are coil bisectors for each coil in a pair or group.

In the post after that, UFO has indicated for the first time I have seen it, that the effect of advancing a connected comm off the brush results in the attached coils advancing by the same angle. From the position of being 'ON' to the position of being 'OFF'.

This position requires to be ideally 20° before the south stator bisector.

Here is the dilemma for a 12 pole 4 pole pairs motor, and a few questions for you :

The comm segments are 30° wide
The brush is 30° wide

P1 is 1° connected
P1 Coil 1 bisector is at 5°
P1 Coil 2 bisector is at 125°

P2 is 29° connected
P2 Coil 1 bisector is at 35°
P2 Coil 2 bisector is at 155°

1) What is the angle of the P2 Coil 2 bisector from the North Stator Bisector when P2 disconnects from the brush.
2) What is the angle of the P1 Coil 2 bisector from the North Stator Bisector when P1 disconnects from the brush.

It has been stated and quoted that the P2 Coil 2 bisector must be 20° from the South Stator Bisector as an ideal 'cease fire' angle when the P2 comm segment disconnects from the brush.

What does that mean if it doesn't mean P2 has to advance 29° to disconnect from the brush ?
What does that mean if it does not mean P2 Coil 2 has to advance 29° before it is 'OFF' ?

Happy Hunting

mark