My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[Ufopolitics]

You guys are hilarious. This clip tells me all I need to know as to who is right and who is wrong. (Edit: Rereading this, I can't tell who is talking.. Is UFO the single comm guy? Or, is it Mark?)

Person 1, you will never be able to do what Person 2 will do precisely because you are trying to convert from a dual commutator configuration to a single comm build. You think a new builder is going to succeed with a single comm configuration, when what you are really doing is condemning the poor newbie to endless failure. Your single comm solution will never work. The reason is simple. By adjusting the brushes in the dual comm build, you can arbitrarily REDUCE the on time as much as needed to get the desired DC pulse to the appropriate wind. You don't think that is important? Too bad. Good luck with your single comm idea.

Thanks Wayne,

But...I will only HOPE that Mark was referring to a full Asymmetric Dual Commutator System...Ohhhhh noooo!!








(I am praying here so we were on same track!)


Wayne...I am the Dual Comm...but Mark wrote "that is why I "adopted" the two comm"??!!...hope is not a typo

[wayne.ct]

The misalignments you are now discussing are the very reasons why I adopted the double comm build that I did...and explained this at the time. The ability for new builders to achieve this level of accuracy on the kitchen table without the correct equipment is a matter of degrees more difficult. It is why I eventually pursued the single comm build because it allows a new builder to perfect the build and avoid focusing on misalignment issues. The single comm is always aligned.

You guys are hilarious. This clip tells me all I need to know as to who is right and who is wrong. (Edit: Rereading this, I can't tell who is talking.. Is UFO the single comm guy? Or, is it Mark?)

Person 1, you will never be able to do what Person 2 will do precisely because you are trying to convert from a dual commutator configuration to a single comm build. You think a new builder is going to succeed with a single comm configuration, when what you are really doing is condemning the poor newbie to endless failure. Your single comm solution will never work. The reason is simple. By adjusting the brushes in the dual comm build, you can arbitrarily REDUCE the on time as much as needed to get the desired DC pulse to the appropriate wind. You don't think that is important? Too bad. Good luck with your single comm idea.

[Ufopolitics]

---S---

Can we get to a position where there is one categoric statement on a perfectly aligned motor that concludes the time on the brush (sweep angle or any other term we care to adopt) is critical in the calculation of motor timing ?

Keep Hunting

mark

Mark,

Once you agree that the switch assembly positioning (previously discussed in other post) could go anywhere around the circumference of our rotor shafts as we please...then we will 'jump' to the next level below.

If We get into that agreement, everything would be so simple...say I get Brushes,plus connecting wires and contacting plates from commutator, exactly 180º apart from the interaction bisectors of coils taking place.

According to your math calculations...then we will have to add 180º plus whatever angle of interaction is formed between coils bisectors and Stator Bisectors Plus switch sweep angle?

See what I mean?

It means, no matter where you set the whole switch...you can not add/mix/combine Interaction Angles to where that switch is located establishing its own sweeping angle.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Realize the units of Tesla (flux density) refer to Webers/square meter (flux per unit area). Therefore size doesn't matter. The electromagnet can be stronger than a permanent magnet whether it is on the cm scale or the m scale or the km scale. The most torque dense motors (attributing to flux and current) are wound field motors, not PM motors. Namely the series wound DC and the switched reluctance motors.

bi

Look, Bistander, you are completely right, correct, I was wrong...

[Ufopolitics]

---S---

@UFO

You have introduced a whole new level of complexity to the discussion which I had deliberately avoided under the title of 'fine detail'. Until now I have only discussed the broad principles and briefly alluded to some points that need to be considered under that title of 'fine'.

If I'm understanding this correctly, you have also changed the terms of reference. We had previously agreed that the brushes could be in Japan and Ireland because the position is not important and now positioning DOES Matter.


Keep Hunting

mark

The wires from Pair Coils to be attached to Commutator Elements-Brushes...I could flex, pull, stretch, Turn them left or right...up or down and connect them wherever I please to do...within interacting angles, or away by 10, 20, 50 100 degrees...it DOES NOT MATTER...that is just an ON-OFF Switching...as a matter of fact one (Understanding "One" as "SWITCH ASSY" NOT JUST "THE BRUSH" Positioning) could be in Japan, while the other one in Ireland...don´t care....or be Remote Control by all means...it does NOT ADD NOR SUBTRACT to the REAL MAGNETIC INTERACTIONS taking place.

Mark, after your response above related to Ireland and Japan and just Brushes positioning...I've realized we both have a very serious problem in understanding each others.

I have highlighted the important part of my paragraph where I mentioned that...take a look at it again...

I am talking about the whole switch assembly that could be anywhere you wanted. And, that switch assembly includes the brushes, BUT as well as the other part of the switch, the contacts...or, in this case the Commutator Elements and, of course the wires terminals that come from each independent coils.

There is a HUGE difference if you move JUST the brushes...and leave the other part of switch...meaning first the lead wires, and the contact plates (commutator elements) in the same location related to Coils Bisectors and Stators specific contacting position.

It don't matter that commutator rotates during operation...always would be "a point" where brushes will reach the specific contacts that makes "the whole switch" turn on.

Just moving the brushes...not anything else...not the wires at contacting plates...not the magnets...it will advance or retard the timing.

The reason of the whole comparison about ONE of the "switch assy" in Japan and the other switch assy in Ireland...was to try to explain that both switches could be anywhere you decide...it don't matter...therefore is NOT relevant to be included within (added) the real magnetic interaction angles taking place between coils and magnets.

This is talking about a Two Commutator and two set of brushes that makes two Switches Assemblies, one upper, one lower.

Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

The wires from Pair Coils to be attached to Commutator Elements-Brushes...I could flex, pull, stretch, Turn them left or right...up or down and connect them wherever I please to do...within interacting angles, or away by 10, 20, 50 100 degrees...it DOES NOT MATTER...that is just an ON-OFF Switching...as a matter of fact one could be in Japan, while the other one in Ireland...don´t care....or be Remote Control by all means...it does NOT ADD NOR SUBTRACT to the REAL MAGNETIC INTERACTIONS taking place.

---S---

The point in this whole deal above...is that the Brush positioning DOES Matter, basically if we are overlooking the 3D Alignment planes.

Second: The position of Brushes, related to Stators Bisectors is our only way to adjust timing. It could be the other way around...meaning moving Stators related to brushes...but...who is gonna do that with fixed magnets structure?...or in bigger size motors like Imperial?

Now, Mark, getting back at your statement, brushes positioning not important?...I really can not understand how could you state that...since it is the ONLY means We have to set the timing?

@UFO

You have introduced a whole new level of complexity to the discussion which I had deliberately avoided under the title of 'fine detail'. Until now I have only discussed the broad principles and briefly alluded to some points that need to be considered under that title of 'fine'.

If I'm understanding this correctly, you have also changed the terms of reference. We had previously agreed that the brushes could be in Japan and Ireland because the position is not important and now positioning DOES Matter.

So let me put 'position' in context so that we can agree. The brushes can be anywhere in the region of 360° including Japan and Ireland if necessary so long as they give us our critical ON and OFF angles. After we take away all the 'detail' the remaining angle represents our timing adjustment. This could be a few degrees either side of Japan and Ireland, it doesn't really matter...because it's relative. The fine positioning is our timing and is relative to the broad positioning which can be anywhere. We both know we could turn to CAD schematics right now and prove that principle with ease.

The misalignments you are now discussing are the very reasons why I adopted the double comm build that I did...and explained this at the time. The ability for new builders to achieve this level of accuracy on the kitchen table without the correct equipment is a matter of degrees more difficult. It is why I eventually pursued the single comm build because it allows a new builder to perfect the build and avoid focusing on misalignment issues. The single comm is always aligned.

So I'm a little mystified why you have introduced misalignment issues to this discussion. First of all we should assume perfect alignment as a prerequisite for debate. The thing new builders have to understand is that on a 28 pole motor for example, it doesn't take a lot of misalignment to mean that there are never 2 comm segments energised at the same time. That would be a pretty incompetent build, but it's not beyond the wit of man to understand.

Can we get to a position where there is one categoric statement on a perfectly aligned motor that concludes the time on the brush (sweep angle or any other term we care to adopt) is critical in the calculation of motor timing ?

Keep Hunting

mark

[bistander]

I know all you have written above. I know you could make an electromagnet the size of a Mansion as well.

I know electromagnets are used to "stamp" the magnetic field within the ceramic mass.

I was referring at the limited space within a motor armature-structure or within a Stator Housing that we all have in order to wind-build a coil and therefore...vualá...we made the "Electromagnet".

Realize the units of Tesla (flux density) refer to Webers/square meter (flux per unit area). Therefore size doesn't matter. The electromagnet can be stronger than a permanent magnet whether it is on the cm scale or the m scale or the km scale. The most torque dense motors (attributing to flux and current) are wound field motors, not PM motors. Namely the series wound DC and the switched reluctance motors.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

The ceramic magnets will have flux density up to about 0.4 Tesla. Neodymiun-Iron-Boron magnets up to about 1.4 Tesla. An electromagnet can easily saturate a sheet steel core to over 1.8 Tesla without excessive excitation. The electromagnets in an MRI device run 1.5 to 3 Tesla and can go up to 8T. Other laboratory equipment using electromagnets can develop fields up to 20 or 30 Tesla. Electromagnets are, or can be, much stronger than permanent magnets. The permanent magnet is magnetized using an electromagnet and can be demagnetized with an electromagnet.

bi

Bistander,

I know all you have written above. I know you could make an electromagnet the size of a Mansion as well.

I know electromagnets are used to "stamp" the magnetic field within the ceramic mass.

I was referring at the limited space within a motor armature-structure or within a Stator Housing that we all have in order to wind-build a coil and therefore...vualá...we made the "Electromagnet".


¿Comprende?

I would have explained in more detail what I meant, plus other issues...but it is not worth it to do so.


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Never, but I mean never an Electromagnet Field could be compared to the real and complete field projected from even a ceramic magnet.

It is a completely different structure...and of course, electromagnets are much more weaker...

The ceramic magnets will have flux density up to about 0.4 Tesla. Neodymiun-Iron-Boron magnets up to about 1.4 Tesla. An electromagnet can easily saturate a sheet steel core to over 1.8 Tesla without excessive excitation. The electromagnets in an MRI device run 1.5 to 3 Tesla and can go up to 8T. Other laboratory equipment using electromagnets can develop fields up to 20 or 30 Tesla. Electromagnets are, or can be, much stronger than permanent magnets. The permanent magnet is magnetized using an electromagnet and can be demagnetized with an electromagnet.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

About Magnets and Electro-Magnets Fields...

I tried it once with one of my first motors to demonstrate electromagnets to my daughter. We were both unimpressed with the sluggish response. The stator of course snaps the needle to attention.

Happy Hunting

mark

Mark,

This was your post at the "Hijacked Thread"...and since I consider I am done there and enough...I will respond to your interesting post here.

I don't know if you have ever screened a Magnetic Field Spectrum under New Technology...like the simple and cheap Magnetic Viewing Film.

The point is I have done it...first with magnets...then with electromagnets...and the difference is outrageous!

Never, but I mean never an Electromagnet Field could be compared to the real and complete field projected from even a ceramic magnet.

It is a completely different structure...and of course, electromagnets are much more weaker...but mainly...there is no dielectric plane at all.

That is one main reason why I have wind from small motors to bigger ones with not single coils...but more complex pairs or groups...just like our master Nikola Tesla suggested...

In order to compensate this huge disadvantage from fired coils versus magnets...we must create duplicated fields, interlace them, overlap them as much as we could, generating higher/stronger and more compact fields to be able to 'compete' trying to reach a balance at the time of interacting forces between them (magnets-electromagnets).

Ken Wheeler (TheoriaApophasis) clearly and extensively writes about this big differences and facts on his book and on his Thread. However, I have noticed how that incredible thread has disappeared from here, by been inactive for so long...while other pieces of crap stays in first place...unbelievable!...But I guess it is the way our Consumption Society works...we pay more attention to TV Shows...with gossip, entertainment...etc...overlooking the very valuable material...simple reason why we are where we are at this times...

And...according to the comment from DadHav...of course even with an almost 'unmovable' rotor, because of magnetic drag...you could get it to spin and develop super fast speeds and power, after we energize coils the proper way...but...at what price?

Maybe DadHav could go a bit more in detail about the kind of motor he is talking about...because He works basically with BLDC Types...which have a whole bunch of magnets in a N-S-N-S-N-S config. and of course a lot of drag...however, a pretty clever Three Phase DC Pulse is required to get rotor to spin.

Brushed Motors do not need such ring of magnets...so drag is much less, however, in both cases, the main conclusion prevails as the fact that an Electromagnet Field Spectrum versus a Magnet Field is in a huge disadvantage...and have absolutely nothing to do with the type of motor...or the fact it can spin powerful despite of a big magnetic drag...consider first the price we pay to get it running that way.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

---S---

[IMG][/IMG]

THE SIZE OF THE BRUSHES DON'T MEAN SH*T...BRUSHES COULD BE MOVED AROUND AS WELL AS MODIFY THEM AS THE BUILDER PLEASES TO..

--S---

@UFO

It is my understanding that we have agreed on all the critical angles making up the connect/disconnect sequence including the 'final agreement' which was including the brush width in the calculation...the sweep angle...the roll off angle or what ever we want to call it.

We are both at a disadvantage, it seems, by not having the complete motor specs. But in fact the only critical spec missing from this 10 pole arrangement is the brush width which is very important. A 36º comm segment will sweep over an 18º brush from 1º ON to 0º OFF in 53º. A 36º comm segment will sweep over a 36º brush from 1º ON to 0º OFF in 71º.

If the sweep angle is 53º then there is 37º for connect and disconnect. Firing at 27º or 20º leaves a 10º or 17º disconnect.

If the sweep angle is 71º then there is 19º for connect and disconnect. I think we can see there is an issue with this structure.

The position of the brush is unimportant. The size of the brush can be critical.

For your second image, C2 has just disconnected at 21º from the SSB, C1 is therefore 36º + 21º = 57º back from the SSB. The brush appears to be 18º wide. To obtain the connection angle we need to back up the coil by 18º. This places the C1 bisector 36º + 18º + 21º = 75º back from the SSB, 15º forward of the NSB.

The timing margin appears to be 10º assuming a minimum 5º firing angle.

If it transpires that the brush is not 18º but 36º then we lose the margin and find ourselves in a deficit of 3º.

If Sam can confirm the brush width then we will know for certain what is achievable with this motor.

Happy Hunting

mark

Mark,

Basically about your statement from above quoted below:

The position of the brush is unimportant. The size of the brush can be critical.

But before, let's start by analyzing Commutator Elements width/angle to Brush width/angle in general terms:

We are adapting Symmetric Motors configurations which utilizes just one brush and one commutator to operate. In Symmetry, there are typically ONLY two ratios established between Commutator number of elements versus rotor number of poles. normally in small motors this ratio is 1:1, meaning if ten poles rotor there are ten comm elements.

In Sampojo ten poles, it is a ten commutator element, and "normally" in the 1:1 ratio, the brush width is the same as each segment. And for example in Imperial this ratio is 2:1, having a 56 comm element versus 28 poles, and each brush size= two comm elements. However, in our Asymm. Imperial We take that comm ratio to 1:1, by bridging every two segments/elements.

Now in this two cases...1:1 or 2:1 We have:

1:1= The circumference of each pole MUST match almost exactly to the circumference of each (one) commutator element/brush.

2:1= Each two(2) comm elements/brush circumference MUST be around the same as one (1) pole circumference size.

Up to here we are fine...This ratios helps you a lot at the time to start laying your CAD Diameters/Construction grid, in order to have a very close to reality model.

If you understand the way Symmetry operates then you should realize why all this measurements should follow such patterns.

BUT, in Asymmetry with two commutators and two brushes every thing changes, because we no longer have a single 2D plane switching to adjust timing, instead we have a "Double Pole Double Throw (DPDT) Switch" operating in a three dimensional (3D) plane. Therefore, in our case we must realize this alignment at the two different switching planes taking place.

I have shown previous diagrams when we had some issues with Imperial not performing as expected...take a look below:

[IMG][/IMG]

Above I am showing two possible miss-alignments between both planes, that could be:

1: Commutators not perfectly aligned between them, meaning, the gaps between segments not aligned perfect between upper and lower.

2: Brushes not aligned in a correct vertical fashion.

In both miss-alignments we are reducing the ON Timing depending on the error angle.

The point in this whole deal above...is that the Brush positioning DOES Matter, basically if we are overlooking the 3D Alignment planes.

At the same time, we could also -on purpose- reduce our On Timing, or delay it (post), or advance it (pre)...just by playing with upper-lower brushes positioning.

And, most important to consider here in General (meaning 1:1, 2:1, Symmetrical or Asymmetrical Models) ...is that IF we JUST move brushes, leaving Stators at the same place, of course it does matter!...Just because we are either firing before or after Stators Bisectors, depending where the brushes plane are set related to Stators Bisectors Planes!.

Concluding here...

First:The Size of the Brushes/Comm Elements are defined by the type of Motor We are working on, therefore, it is no big deal figuring this out by just knowing the number of poles at rotor, since it is given by our rotor # of poles structure.

Second: The position of Brushes, related to Stators Bisectors is our only way to adjust timing. It could be the other way around...meaning moving Stators related to brushes...but...who is gonna do that with fixed magnets structure?...or in bigger size motors like Imperial?

Now, Mark, getting back at your statement, brushes positioning not important?...I really can not understand how could you state that...since it is the ONLY means We have to set the timing?

Furthermore by setting differences between upper-lower brushes positioning it could also reflect in our motors performance drastically to the better or to the worst.

So, I recommend before you start adding and subtracting angles from coils bisectors, stator bisectors,brushes ...as commutator elements...to have all this simple facts info above pretty well defined in your mind.


Regards



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

G'Day UFO
I for one do not want to see you pull your imformative drawings and explanations from this or any of your sites.
I for one have found you to be very obliging when different ones have been sincerely replicating your drawings and findings and showing thier results here for all to see.
I have been very busy as I mentioned some time ago that I had some projects I had started prior to me starting to replicate your findings I am almost finished thes projects.

I would like if Midaz would just stick to his thread and not make his disruptive comments here he has said his ideas are better than yours I also remember that over the time he has poster here he has not been replicating any of your diagrams (with the exception of the Imperial motor ) but has always been interjecting or rather fault finding with your comments and answers
Midaz has always telling/ asking other members here what they should do with thier projects never even trying to do them himself

I feel that you should just ignore his disparaging remarks do not reply to any of his comments and please continue with your experimenting and showing us your results as you stated in your very first post that you were disclosing your findings here.

I am waiting for the time I can spend to wind all north poles on one of the remaining Imperial motors I have.


Please Midaz do not post here any more of your disruptive comments. You have started your own thread please continue there so as to keep the harmony here

Midaz I really appreciate the quad JS controller that Dana made for you that you never used I eventually use it with my next build and have the software to run it

Every one knows that if you have a fire and you do not want a fire you do not keep adding fuel to it and it will eventually go out
Kindest regards to all
kogs

Hello my friend Kogs!!

It is so great to see you around!!

I am glad you are almost finished with other work, which means you will be coming back here steadily very soon!!

And do not worry...I will not pull out anything except Midaztouch aka Richard Bates.

After He is gone with his "wind" blowing up his AS.....YMMETRIC single coils...then everything will return back to normality here.

Then We will build that All North Imperial Pairs to show what it could do!!


Kind and very Warm Regards dear Friend!!


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

You really need desperately to seek for psychiatric help Richard...I believe working with your only motor for too long and for the first time in your life , all this windings and loose wires, commutators, brushes angles...etc,etc has been more than what you could handle...it has caused serious delusional symptoms you are exposing all over this Forum.

A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, confabulation, dogma, illusion, or other effects of perception.

I am pretty sure there should be some excellent Doctors in Psychiatry in Japan...I am being seriously as a heart attack!

Ask them to run on you an APT "Asymmetric Pathology Testing"

[Ufopolitics]

when a coil winding collects energy, from a magnet, will it hold onto all of that energy for a while, and store it for a second or 2, before waiting for the the brush to come along ?

or does it loose energy rapidly ?

Coils retain/store energy for minimal time, Grounded. That minimal time depends on coil characteristics as Impedance and type of Cores, That is the reason why they need to work together with Capacitors to assist storage capabilities in what is called a "Tank Circuit"...

Besides above fact, you are talking about "Induction" as 'collecting energy' from a magnet, so is understood a required movement (magnet passing by coil or the opposite) must be involved, so this complicates the response, because it is no longer a Static Coil...so, as soon as magnet leaves, or even as it approaches, there is a counter energy generated within coil and core, based on Lenz Law. This minimizes even more the Induction Process as a "Subtract Operation" to the positive energy.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[grounded]

when a coil winding collects energy, from a magnet, will it hold onto all of that energy for a while, and store it for a second or 2, before waiting for the the brush to come along ?

or does it loose energy rapidly ?