My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[Ufopolitics]

Delay Times...

Pulse sequence: Ah!! Thanks a lot. That makes things clear - but more complicated.

1. Nico's generator was optimized in order to get the maximum freqency out of Arduino along variable duty cycle. His approach is very smart but will not allow for several delayed phases at same time.

2. Fortunately we seem not to use frequency fo several hundred KHz. Hence we can choose another approach with more grades of freedom.

3. Unfortunately we talk here of pulses being generate synchronously to the revolutions of the armature. Hence another complication by necessity of taking sync pulses from shaft. No free running generator! This step was expected and now is an unrgent need. Some initial info on these facts along Arduino.

4. The delay might not be constant but might vary along revolution speed.

Please confirm if the notions above are correct. I will dig into matters.
JS

Hello John,

1. Nico's generator was optimized in order to get the maximum frequency out of Arduino along variable duty cycle. His approach is very smart but will not allow for several delayed phases at same time.

Now, here Frequency and Duty Cycle could be generated/regulated Equally to the Four Channels...so, one adjustment will apply to all four phases.

2. Fortunately we seem not to use frequency fo several hundred KHz. Hence we can choose another approach with more grades of freedom.

Yes, that is correct John, the Frequency as the Duty Cycle will still continue adjusting Motor Speed, no matter of Dead Time spec's.

3. Unfortunately we talk here of pulses being generated synchronously to the revolutions of the armature. Hence another complication by necessity of taking sync pulses from shaft. No free running generator! This step was expected and now is an unrgent need. Some initial info on these facts along Arduino.

Nope, we don't need to feedback from motor revolutions John. Like I wrote above, frequency and duty cycle would STILL BE Regulating Speed...no matter of dead time adjustment.

All Four sets of Motor Brushes would still be "ready to fire" when receiving a Pulse ANYTIME, They are located at the same strategical points...and the regulation of that pulse "Intensity" will provoke either a stronger or weaker rotation.


All the Delay does is the following:

We send a pulse to Gate P1, say Pair 1 is the one there, making contact...now if there would not be a delay...Gate P8 would receive same exact pulse, therefore, Pair 8 would get energized simultaneously to Pair 1(That's how we been running them so far)...BUT, with delay...it will NOT occur like that...Gate P8 will be pulsing P9 or P10, because delay caused to move P8 away/forward from contact with Gate P8.

4. The delay might not be constant but might vary along revolution speed.

Delay should be constant, maintaining same time ratio between Phases, even though we should be able to reduce it or amplify it, but maintaining EQUAL Timing between Gates Input.

Later on we could be able to reduce them in a "synchronized" fashion, from more to less or reversed...but for now let's keep it simple...let's keep it constant...

We should be able to start at Zero Delay, then start increasing it along all Phases in the same ratio.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[JohnStone]

OK! Struggling for clear requirements:

For now we need to produce a 4 phase signal with 4 pulsers.(rotating field)
Adjustable items:

• frequency
• duty cycle
• dead time between pulses

It is very difficult to control those 3 paramters by hand. Fortunately dead time and variable pulse off time relate somehow. Hence my suggestion:

We define following facts:

• Setup shall be able to generate 2, 3, 4, 6 phases
• Frequency is the repetion rate of pulses regarding one phase.
• All 4 phases share same frequency, duty cycle, dead time.
• At any given frequency the duty cycle cannot exceed i.e. 25% (given 4 phases, dead time = 0 -> preventing any overlapping of phases)
• Dead time performs as a constant in ms. It will not vary along frequency but will limit duy cylce automatically. Additionally it will limit max. freqeuncy in order to prevent effective duty cycles below 1%.

Any further additions?

Arduino:

• I suppose to increase the four control switches from 4 to 6 in order to add control for dead time.
• For Ardunio approach there are several choices. These will be discussed at the other thread being idle at the moment.

JS

[prochiro]

@UFO
I just ran the setup posted on #4305 as a sample test. Vary strange....
With 36 volts I got between 2000 and 2200 Rpm with the switch on and used between 15 and 20 amps. The reason for the range is that this set is so touchy with frequency and duty settings that there is many sweet and not sweet spots. There is a lot of interesting behavior with this setup and if this is any indication of what you are setting up with the Quad pulse, things will get both tricky and vary interesting. Something I noted was when running with switch on, everything maxed out, turning switch off caused no change for several minutes or more, strange.
Dana

[sampojo]

Second that motion

Hello UFO, JS, DANA and all, would it be preferable to have a single hard pulse per commutator segment,( coil-pair ), always locked into motor RPM, that you could adjust for on time and also firing sequence?

I may be off track here, but to me it seems counter productive to the rotational inertia to have multiple firings per comm segment. In other words, the coil pair is turning ON then OFF with field starting to think about collapsing, and then turned On again and re energised a number of times before disconnecting from commutator segment. Maybe a waste of valuable incoming current and switching our monsters more than needed.


Please let me know if you think this would be a better option Guys, because i have some ideas, if you think it is.

Warm Regards Cornboy.

I can only imagine this at my level of operations, but I would operate on that assumption. I believe that pulsing any one commutator with more than one pulse during brush contact puts hot electricity fighting CEMF, very similar to a symmetrical motor, something that we are ardently fighting to never do again. With one pulse circuit, hooked up to both sets of motor brushes on an Imperial style quad stator, 28 poles, at 3000 rpm, one would start pulsing some commutator more than once per contact at freqs above 163kcps. If you imagine pulsing say a factor of 10 slower, and a duty cycle of something like 50%, you will be pulsing many segments in a row as if the motor was hooked up to a battery, and then the volts will drop down to zero for several more segments, and those coils will have no charge put into them and simply go coasting by. If there is a magic that happens at odd frequencies out of sync with rotation, it should be maximized when each coil gets a pulse and a CEMF tap with each half rotation on a quad stator, and then fall off more rapidly as freq. increases, if the theory is correct about re-introducing CEMF. Could be a wonderful test when someone gets all this under control.

[Ufopolitics]

Dead Times

OK! Struggling for clear requirements:

Hello John,

First I want to say that your Monster Pulser worked out perfectly well, handling the Imperial Asymmetric, as Prochiro showed Us all on his videos...I mean, if one pulser is capable to handle two parallel Gates simultaneously...then it could easily handle just One...right?

I understand this Dead Time programming and generation between Pulsers/Phases is an Issue completely in the hands of the Arduino and its Software...as also the ability of the programmer to make it happen properly...

The Monster Pulser does not need any modifications at all on this "side" of Data Signaling sent to its Gates...right John?


So, please do not struggle here...you did an excellent work in that Monster Pulser...and works like a Charm...

Going back to "Dead Times"...

For now we need to produce a 4 phase signal with 4 pulsers.(rotating field)
Adjustable items:

• frequency
• duty cycle
• dead time between pulses

It is very difficult to control those 3 parameters by hand. Fortunately dead time and variable pulse off time relate somehow.

Yes I agree that Dead Time and Off Time somehow "relate" on some similitude...a Dead Time is actually an Off Time...if looked at just One Channel...
However, off Time relates to just One Pulse/One Channel...while to have a Dead Time, we need -at least- Two Channels/Two different Sources Pulsing to establish the Dead Time between them two.

In order to clear this "Dead Time" issue let's focus in the Start-End of the On Times only (Actually that is what really matters here)

The Dead Time between Two Phases/Two Cycles, when referring to square waves, basically affects the Time when they Turn On-Off...

Hence my suggestion:

We define following facts:

• Setup shall be able to generate 2, 3, 4, 6 phases
• Frequency is the repetion rate of pulses regarding one phase.
• All 4 phases share same frequency, duty cycle, dead time.
• At any given frequency the duty cycle cannot exceed i.e. 25% (given 4 phases, dead time = 0 -> preventing any overlapping of phases)
• Dead time performs as a constant in ms. It will not vary along frequency but will limit duy cylce automatically. Additionally it will limit max. freqeuncy in order to prevent effective duty cycles below 1%.

Any further additions?

John, on this "deal" (Imperial-Mecc Alte) we are reaching for very known parameters at Motor side...

We need a MIN of 3200 RPM's, and a MAX of 3800 RPM's...where the "ideal working speed" be 3600 RPM's (for U.S Replications, for Europe and South America is 3000)

That job could easily be done by One Monster Module pulsing P1-P15...

But we still have to know the Amperage when Imperial starts turning Generator being pulsed...plus, when we add loads to it...and things will do change here...I hope not...we will see when Prochiro or Machine runs this set up...

Dana said he will run a test tomorrow, with just one pulser...based on graphic I posted, where amperage is very low...however this is still "not the end"...Imperial has to be coupled to Gen Head...then see how it behaves...

The Dead Time driving, I believe will bring amperage down even more...as it will "upgrade" Machine Performance to Max spec's...

However...IF it works fine without that much complications...let's then...forget about it my friend...and keep it as simple as possible...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Donald Haas]

Tread mill motor done

Hi All,

Just wanted to link a couple pics to my tread mill motor.

I used the L brackets to hold it together and it works well.

Had to make a shaft from scratch and was forced to use 8mm bearings or fab brush holders also.

I wound it "light" because UFO had doubts bout the 16p, 2 brush setup. It seems to run normal.

The local motor shop wants to see it. I told them what I was doing and they gave me some wedges and ask to see it when it's done.

I want to get them involved with a BIG!! motor as a joint project.

I'll try to dazzle them a little with UFO's footwork.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dn36nuerpj...ackets%201.JPG

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eb70k7j6kk...ackets%202.JPG

Keepin' on,

bro d

[Ufopolitics]

Ok...

@UFO
I just ran the setup posted on #4305 as a sample test. Vary strange....
With 36 volts I got between 2000 and 2200 Rpm with the switch on and used between 15 and 20 amps. The reason for the range is that this set is so touchy with frequency and duty settings that there is many sweet and not sweet spots. There is a lot of interesting behavior with this setup and if this is any indication of what you are setting up with the Quad pulse, things will get both tricky and vary interesting. Something I noted was when running with switch on, everything maxed out, turning switch off caused no change for several minutes or more, strange.
Dana

Hello Dana,

OK, You wrote:

With 36 volts I got between 2000 and 2200 Rpm with the switch on and used between 15 and 20 amps.

Ok , now ...Did you start Pulsing P15?

According to what you wrote there...you were getting those readings by just turning SW 1 On...and that's ok...but, is that right?
As you start pulsing P15 the Motor should have gone to much higher RPM's (as also increasing some amps) ...


A part of My Post 4305:

What would happen is...You turn on SW1, Motor gets in the low amperage low RPM's (1950)...cool commutators, etc...
Then you start SLOWLY hitting the Monster...and would notice a huge jump in Rotor behavior...as it will do spark high on P15 Brushes...please reduce all parameters at start up, all...then start going up slowly watching RPM's and Amperage...as Commutator and your FET's Temperature.

Did you do that?...did it increased RPM's?
Did it increased Amps?

Something I noted was when running with switch on, everything maxed out, turning switch off caused no change for several minutes or more, strange.
Dana

Maxed Out to what numbers?...what readings?

You were NOT supposed to turn Off Switch 1 first, while Pulsing P15...

It did that (continue running without change after SW1 OFF) because the way Inductors are connected between P1 and P8,P22...Have you noticed a longer running time after turning it off completely?

The way you turn this set ON is:

FIRST the SW1/ON...Then start pulsing P15 with your Monster...till reaching desired RPM's...

Turning it OFF is the Opposite Operation, same sequence though:

Turn OFF First Pulser to Zero Freq/Duty Cycle...(or just switch it off if possible)...then SW1 and Machine is off...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Glad it runs great!

Hi All,

Just wanted to link a couple pics to my tread mill motor.

I used the L brackets to hold it together and it works well.

Had to make a shaft from scratch and was forced to use 8mm bearings or fab brush holders also.

I wound it "light" because UFO had doubts bout the 16p, 2 brush setup. It seems to run normal.

The local motor shop wants to see it. I told them what I was doing and they gave me some wedges and ask to see it when it's done.

I want to get them involved with a BIG!! motor as a joint project.

I'll try to dazzle them a little with UFO's footwork.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dn36nuerpj...ackets%201.JPG

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eb70k7j6kk...ackets%202.JPG

Keepin' on,

bro d

Hello Donald,


Glad it runs perfect!

That Motor looks great though!...honestly, it looks like "nothing" ever happened to it!!...that no one has ever "abuse" of it so much!!...

Hope you could Dazzle this guys into building something very BIG!!...that would be awesome...

Maybe they decide to make you an "Associated Partner"...lol


Regards


Ufopolitics

[prochiro]

@UFO
What I did was start motor with s1 off at first, but later did it with s1 on. No difference until pulse is started. With 36 volts, Motor starts up and runs at 1100 RPM. At this point vary rough motor vibration and running thru P1,P15,P8 and using 13.5 amps. S1 turned on with 30%DS and 300Hz. Amps now at 18.0. Frequency and duty cycle both raised for max RPM of 2200 ,( this is what I mean by maxed out) ,and amps now at 20 for 15 to 30 seconds then down to 9 or 10 amps for duration of run. Motor has a strange whine noise that changes with frequency. Sparking is low but not minimal. If duty is adjusted to 100%, turning s1 on or off has no change in motor or amps. As I said, this setup is different although at this point I need to play with it more tomorrow to better understand it. At one point the motor RPM sped up vary fast but still only to 2200 RPM.
Dana

[Ufopolitics]

Hey Dana...

@UFO
What I did was start motor with s1 off at first, but later did it with s1 on. No difference until pulse is started. With 36 volts, Motor starts up and runs at 1100 RPM. At this point vary rough motor vibration and running thru P1,P15,P8 and using 13.5 amps. S1 turned on with 30%DS and 300Hz. Amps now at 18.0. Frequency and duty cycle both raised for max RPM of 2200 ,( this is what I mean by maxed out) ,and amps now at 20 for 15 to 30 seconds then down to 9 or 10 amps for duration of run. Motor has a strange whine noise that changes with frequency. Sparking is low but not minimal. If duty is adjusted to 100%, turning s1 on or off has no change in motor or amps. As I said, this setup is different although at this point I need to play with it more tomorrow to better understand it. At one point the motor RPM sped up vary fast but still only to 2200 RPM.
Dana

Hello Dana,

You sound excited...are you?

Ok, I never got (that I can remember) any straight-linear (direct from batteries) runs of your Motor previously...that will tell me what it does (RPM's-Amps Draw) when you feed P1-P15 straight to batt...and I need that data Dana...as I do not know either your resistance per Pair (average)

There are some simple testing you could do to Diagnose your problem...please do them and get back to me:

First, run Motor straight from your 36V battery bank, (Use a 50 Amp Rated Switch or Higher...Do NOT use Contact Blades Switch!) feeding P1 and P15 Parallel...leave output Gates P8-P22 Open.

I use this Switch from RS...So far they have hold up the heat very well...
SPST 12VDC/50A On/Off Toggle Switch : Toggle Switches | RadioShack.com

Need to know your RPM's and Amp Draw there

Second, run Motor straight from 36 V Bank BUT only feeding P15.

Need to know RPM's and Amp draw there

There is something wrong there my friend...have no idea till you tell me your results above.
When you trigger P15, only a little bit of pulsing...even slow...Motor is supposed to jump like a Wild, Untamed Black Stallion my friend...and RPM's should climb sky high...then you would need to bring down pulses quick...that result...was, what I was expecting...


Let me know this readouts before you proceed testing with this pulser-set up, from my diagram.

Thanks for all your great work and effort to accomplish this!!


Warm Regards


Ufopolitics

[Cornboy 555]

Shake your booty.

Hello Cornboy,


Yes, definitively very similar, however, like I mentioned in the above post...it will not affect the way you have already set your timing, related to firing Pairs / Stators Bisectors.

This Rotors are NOT balanced by the way we wind them...Who could balance a Spiral that grows from small to huge final stages?
It will take a lot of weights from "Inside Out" to create an "Opposite Turning Spiral of counter weights"...and we definitively do not want that...we will kill the "Hammering Effect"...BOOM!

The sweet spot, would be the one that delivers the right tuning for Rotor to discharge evenly, at a timed/sequenced ratio...that Hammering from the heavier rotor side...

Think about the Pendulum Effect...figure a heavy weight hanging at the end of pendulum arm, it will take a lot of force to get it moving, swinging...but once you've got it traveling the desired distance...you do not need to apply the same force...but just a bit of impulse...HOWEVER, You MUST WAIT for the PERFECT Timing to apply that small push...You can NEVER Fight it when it is bringing its own force...you must wait for that "momentum" to apply it...


Something very similar applies here my friend...


Regards


Ufopolitics

Hello UFO, and all, are you saying here UFO, NOT to balance the rotor when finished wound? Like with epoxy putty.

If so i better bolt the test bench to the concrete, and use stiff rubber mounts on motor.

Motorcross bikes and others, that have pressed together crankshafts, are now having the crank halves pressed together out of alignment on purpose as it gives them extra top end performance.

They shake like a belly dancer at low RPM's but when you punch the throttle, MAN is there a response!, and smooth out at high RPM's.

Are we looking at the same effect here?

Asymmetric in every single way!

Regards Cornboy.

[Ufopolitics]

Balance/Unbalance

Hello UFO, and all, are you saying here UFO, NOT to balance the rotor when finished wound? Like with epoxy putty.

If so i better bolt the test bench to the concrete, and use stiff rubber mounts on motor.

Motorcross bikes and others, that have pressed together crankshafts, are now having the crank halves pressed together out of alignment on purpose as it gives them extra top end performance.

They shake like a belly dancer at low RPM's but when you punch the throttle, MAN is there a response!, and smooth out at high RPM's.

Are we looking at the same effect here?

Asymmetric in every single way!

Regards Cornboy.

Cornboy,

I was referring to the windings...not the bare rotor, rotor MUST be balanced as far as Epoxy and Steel Laminations...
The Spiral configuration that windings create in an Asymmetrical Machine should not be balanced.

And no, it will not vibrate that much at all...rotation tends to even the weights to an even balance...and of course, the higher the speed the better it will perform.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Cornboy 555]

After winding.

OK, got ya UFO, i was reffering to final static balancing of rotor, say on knife edges, after winding and fitted with comms.

Thanks Cornboy.

[jeffy39]

comm. mods

Howdy UFO, All,
Has it been determined that the comm. gaps need to be widened?
If so, how much? Also, every gap or just the trailing gap when 2 segs.
are jumpered together?
I can make some progress if comm. gaps dont need to be cut.
Thanx much, jw

[Cornboy 555]

You get that.

I can only imagine this at my level of operations, but I would operate on that assumption. I believe that pulsing any one commutator with more than one pulse during brush contact puts hot electricity fighting CEMF, very similar to a symmetrical motor, something that we are ardently fighting to never do again. With one pulse circuit, hooked up to both sets of motor brushes on an Imperial style quad stator, 28 poles, at 3000 rpm, one would start pulsing some commutator more than once per contact at freqs above 163kcps. If you imagine pulsing say a factor of 10 slower, and a duty cycle of something like 50%, you will be pulsing many segments in a row as if the motor was hooked up to a battery, and then the volts will drop down to zero for several more segments, and those coils will have no charge put into them and simply go coasting by. If there is a magic that happens at odd frequencies out of sync with rotation, it should be maximized when each coil gets a pulse and a CEMF tap with each half rotation on a quad stator, and then fall off more rapidly as freq. increases, if the theory is correct about re-introducing CEMF. Could be a wonderful test when someone gets all this under control.

Hello Sampojo, i don't know how under control, any R&D can be, especially when everyone here has to try and balance earning a living and paying the bills, with longing to do more building or testing on their minds constantatly.

I am Lucky in a way, as farm work involves a lot of manual labour, which allows lot's of time to think about what's been posted here.

On reflection, UFO has already addressed multiple pulsing/ commutator segment, it's just that it probably went over my head at the time and now it seems more important. Going back through the thread requires huge time now.

I will eventually do that test on MAG3, with 3 independantly adjustable vane hall sensors and a 36 hole metal vane on motor shaft, sending signal to monsters, but i can see that motor speed control would be messy, and response to varying load conditions even more so.

We mustn't forget that UFO, has Been There & Done That, and his collaboration with John Stone on motor control is taking us in a direction of electronic motor control for the future, and is teaching us in a manner that we will never forget the tech.

Sometimes you wish you could take back a post, but it describes who you are to everyone here.

Warm Regards Sampojo,

Cornboy.