My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[HuntingRoss]

I've already graduated and wrote my thesis. On the first shot, the A1Mo-Gen works just like I said it would, before I made it.

I don't doubt you Midaz. But I am awaiting the proof. Your thread to date has no schematic and no test results. So I patiently and optimistically await the successful conclusion of your journey.

Herders lead the flock with wise animals. Herders let the Wild by Nature animals do as they please & observe, because they must learn what best for the flock. Herders isolate and slaughter stubborn animals first because they don't like to waste unnecessary time and energy.

I love these Orange stories. I see myself as the 'Wild by Nature'. I guess you see me as 'stubborn'. And I'll take a stab that you're the 'Herder' in this fantasy.

Do you see this as your responsibility on this thread/forum to -

isolate and slaughter stubborn animals

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

[IMG][/IMG]


So, let's wipe out from this design... brushes, commutators, elements, poles, coils wires etc,etc...plain simple view like above , BASIC Magnetic Interacting Fields.

In Figure above BLUE arrows means CENTER of COILS, where Light Blue means Coils turning Off, Disconnecting,Coil Dies,etc and Blue means START Fire...simple?

It is understood that Each Interacting Coil MUST BE WOUND somewhere around the SAME Circumference length of ONE Stator.

So, no matter how many poles coils have, no matter if pairs, single coils or groups, "hybrids", etc...the MAIN PRINCIPLE APPLIES TO ALL, THE CENTER OF EACH INDEPENDENT, SINGLE COIL.

Pairs do TWO Interactions/Timings that MUST BE observed (your case) meaning, say Coil 1 fires at 5º (Repulse Mode) in front of North Stator and Coil 2 is also ON, BUT at around, say 30º (Attract Mode) to South Stator. HOWEVER, it must be observed when TWO PAIRS are ON, to check "leaving pair" is not still ON passed the critical angle of attraction limits.

Hello UFO.

Thank you for the simple and concise diagram illustrating the key principles that the self appointed Team Spokesman felt necessary to dig back into the archive and dredge up an old '4 pole pairs' schematic of mine.

If the Team Spokesman can grasp your diagram overlaid onto the 4 pole diagram he dredged up he would see that my explanation above fits perfectly.

It is not possible make a 12 pole rotor in a 4 pole pairs configuration conform to those principles. The angle between the pairs is 120°. Add that to the connect and disconnect angles, 145°. The sweep angle for the pair on the comm is just less than 60°. I'll call that 200°...which explains why the self appointed Team Spokesman retired from the challenge to draw the key principles on a schematic because it demonstrates the so called 'incorrect' timing shown on my diagram is, as stated previously 'uncorrectable'.

I don't claim to have known that or understood it at the time of that diagram...that's why it's called a learning curve.

Today I played with the timing on the SC7 with +/- 15°. The 0° on the OEM setting for the SC7 is 21°, so it was adjusting between 6° and 36° past the north stator bisector.

Happy Hunting

mark

[GChilders]

wedges for imperial motor

@UFOPolitics

Sorry to bother you with this but I am trying to order the wedges for the Imperial Motor. You have posted the size somewhere 5MM wide by 4MM legs. In your build video, I think it is the third one you mention that you were going to post EIS part number. I have gone through their catalogue and cannot find a wedge that matches the size. Could you send the part number in a post. Might save some time.

Thanks a million

Garry

[Ufopolitics]

Here's an easier option and way quicker than me winding a motor.

Draw for us/me a 12 pole motor in a 4 pole pairs configuration demonstrating the fundamental theory of an Asymm motor as described by you. I know you don't have CAD but I'll accept any half decent legible annotated hand sketch photographed and posted here highlighting all the key principles.

While you're at it, draw one for a 5 pole pair too.

Happy Hunting

mark

Hello Matk,


Mark, I will put it even simpler than your request above...

A General design applicable TO SET TIMING FOR ALL NORTH MOTORS (Four Stators just consider the Two Adjacent Stators which MUST BE N-S, meaning...spread diagram and mirror it at 180º):

[IMG][/IMG]


So, let's wipe out from this design... brushes, commutators, elements, poles, coils wires etc,etc...plain simple view like above , BASIC Magnetic Interacting Fields.

In Figure above BLUE arrows means CENTER of COILS, where Light Blue means Coils turning Off, Disconnecting,Coil Dies,etc and Blue means START Fire...simple?

It is understood that Each Interacting Coil MUST BE WOUND somewhere around the SAME Circumference length of ONE Stator.

So, no matter how many poles coils have, no matter if pairs, single coils or groups, "hybrids", etc...the MAIN PRINCIPLE APPLIES TO ALL, THE CENTER OF EACH INDEPENDENT, SINGLE COIL.

Pairs do TWO Interactions/Timings that MUST BE observed (your case) meaning, say Coil 1 fires at 5º (Repulse Mode) in front of North Stator and Coil 2 is also ON, BUT at around, say 30º (Attract Mode) to South Stator. HOWEVER, it must be observed when TWO PAIRS are ON, to check "leaving pair" is not still ON passed the critical angle of attraction limits.

Now, and again, this are MINIMAL DEGREES, if you pass them towards making them smaller, motor would tend to increase AMPS, and tend to lock up/stall...a WEAKER MACHINE.

HOWEVER, all this adjustments depends of CONSTANT OPERATING SPEED OF MACHINE, so, for super faster motors, according to external input etc, it is supposed you should INCREASE this ANGLES, as Garry Childers mentioned prior...You MUST look for the SWEET SPOT.

For me the best way to find Sweet Spot is by having Motor connected to a PSU (Power Supply Unit, BUT, MAINLY meaning showing VOLTS and AMPS), running while I adjust timing.

For those who do not have a PSU, then add Volt and Amps Meters while timing...the rest is COMMON SENSE, or "hearing", "feeling" motor spins faster, free...not dragging, no stalling...and of course, after found Sweet Spot, then have it running for a while and check temperature, etc...

Finding the sweet spot is not just "one attempt and that's it"...it means after you find it...then roll back and forth to see where is the increase of speed and lower amps...and where is the opposite...then you got the RANGE where sweet spot is, mark this with some +<...I...>- ...and what I mean is that after this Range is found...then try stalling motor and watching the UNDER LOAD SWEET SPOT, which must be between those range points as well, more likely setting it a bit more towards the plus (+).

Only after this stage is FINISHED, then you do Torque or Road testings.


Good Hunting!


Ufopolitics

[Midaztouch]

Here's an easier option and way quicker than me winding a motor.

Draw for us/me a 12 pole motor in a 4 pole pairs configuration demonstrating the fundamental theory of an Asymm motor as described by you. I know you don't have CAD but I'll accept any half decent legible annotated hand sketch photographed and posted here highlighting all the key principles.

While you're at it, draw one for a 5 pole pair too.

Happy Hunting

Mark

I've already graduated and wrote my thesis. On the first shot, the A1Mo-Gen works just like I said it would, before I made it.

Is UFOs images not crystal-clear for you!? That work is for you to do.

Do your thing

Midaz

Herders lead the flock with wise animals. Herders let the Wild by Nature animals do as they please & observe, because they must learn what best for the flock. Herders isolate and slaughter stubborn animals first because they don't like to waste unnecessary time and energy.

[HuntingRoss]

Try the pairs winding 4 poles again. Then try the pairs winding 5 poles

Here's an easier option and way quicker than me winding a motor.

Draw for us/me a 12 pole motor in a 4 pole pairs configuration demonstrating the fundamental theory of an Asymm motor as described by you. I know you don't have CAD but I'll accept any half decent legible annotated hand sketch photographed and posted here highlighting all the key principles.

While you're at it, draw one for a 5 pole pair too.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Midaztouch]

Mark


Everyone knows who is the mule in the story.


In your last post to me, the first image's words are correctl... but you didn't look at the brush connection position on the commutator and see which coils are in contact/energized. That's why you misinterpreted the post.... And apparently, still doing it.

Be prepared to listen. We, as a team, tried to correct YOUR mistake at that time. I/we have been doing it for years and knew that to look at! Now I'm trying it one last time. Then I'm done trying to explain the timing to you.

Try the pairs winding 4 poles again. Then try the pairs winding 5 poles, anyway you like... Within our specs and/or stop confussing potential builders of asymmetric motors.


Midaz

Observation and Commonsense is the foundation of Science! Lucky is not Science.

[HuntingRoss]

I find this an almost worthless measurement for torque.

Fair enough Garry. It wasn't supposed to be a measurement for torque, it was offered as an indication...a repeatable load applied at the radius of the shaft (torque).

DC Motors

When the shaft is fully loaded and not allowed to move, the speed is zero and the motor is producing its stall torque (ST), the maximum possible torque.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Edit. I should probably add that the inspiration for this idea is not mine. It is a simplified Prony test.]

[HuntingRoss]

You were told how to set the timing correctly the first time. You just misinterpreted the posts.

Interesting. So the following is my misinterpretation -

...and in your 12 Pole:

[IMG][/IMG]

....and your needle to adjust timing here is based on the common slot at Pairs Center, where P# are written.

[IMG][/IMG]

There was a mistake I made when I wrote that your 'needle' to align timing was the center of both coils, as you have pointed in your above diagram...I apologize for this mistake.

It is wrong, in Pairs there are Two Separate Bisectors that We must consider when making the proper timing alignment, each Coil have a separate Bisector right at the center, in this case (4 poles coils) it would be the center slot between the 2+2 poles.

In the above Diagram (my Diagram) I have pointed out the Bisector for P1, Coil 1 as P1(1)BISECTOR

Every design of the Asymmetric motors; group, pairs & singular coils have produce a fair amount of Voltage out... Always! If the single commutator doesn't produce voltage out in pairs.... It's another design flaw for SC.

SC9 is the first motor I have built that displayed virtually no voltage output. SC6 is the first motor I have built which produces more than the PSU input. You could explain why this is not obvious when you read my results.

5° is NOT "The Optimal Setting", it was just a learning guideline.

You would have to call it 0° at the north stator bisector connect and call it 0° at the south stator bisector disconnect for the 'incorrect' motor timing to fit the 'theory' of timing. Call it 1° at either end and the geometry of the motor will not fit the 'theory' and therefore is not 'incorrect' because it is not correctable.

If you still question us/me on how we set the timing for Asymmetric Motors!?

I've already said the theory is sound, it's your application of it that is questionable. Somehow the laws of maths and geometry evade the 'theory' of winding an Asymm motor. You can't connect after and disconnect before the stator bisectors with a rotor design that makes that journey in 180° minimum.

You can lead a mule to water but you can't make it drink.

Who is the mule and whio is the water in this Orange story ?

Happy Hunting

mark

[sampojo]

Re: GChilders testing proposals Post 7438 on use of batteries

Looking at statement about batteries not liking to be charged and discharged simultaneously...

3.The last test I want to conduct is the advantages and disadvantages of a dual system v/s wiring the brushes in series..... I know that batteries do not like being charged while they are being drained. The idea here is similar to the Tesla switch, as one system is running the motor the other is collecting energy and then the roles are reversed. At some point the capacitor mentioned in the previous test is filled and when that system begins to be used to power the motor, the capacitor is emptied into the idled system battery. One battery charging and the other drained to run the motor....
Cheers

Garry

This arrangement sounds interesting and am not in complete understanding. However I am contemplating some tests and am thinking about using just capacitors. I don't know if there is some drawback, but it is simple concept. I think they could easily handle the floating charge/discharge operation.

[Midaztouch]

Mark

You were told how to set the timing correctly the first time. You just misinterpreted the posts. It wasn't UFO's fault. I understood everything he wrote to you clearly. He apologized, to keep you going but he didn't need to. (Remember, you were the only one building something at that time.) Setting the Timing has been very difficult for rookies, myself included, thats why the rest of us tried to help you but you would not listen.


Every design of the Asymmetric motors; group, pairs & singular coils have produce a fair amount of Voltage out... Always! If the single commutator doesn't produce voltage out in pairs.... It's another design flaw for SC.

5° is NOT "The Optimal Setting", it was just a learning guideline. Like It was said many times before.

I built my first motor 2 Yrs ago. It was pairs. The same thinking for Setting the Timing then, is the same as now. It's the asymmetric motors fact/specs.
Again Below...

1.) First coil's BISECTOR, in rotor rotation, is the beginning timing. It must be AFTER the magnet's bisector

2.) Secondly the last coil's BISECTOR must be disconnected from the power source BEFORE it aligns with the next magnet's bisector.

3.) Lastly, adjust the brush housings for front & rear brushes alignment and then find the timing for Optimal Performance or what you need.


This is how WE have been Setting the Timing for the asymmetric motors/generators for years. There is nothing wrong!

If you still question us/me on how we set the timing for Asymmetric Motors!? Read and reread this entire thread for the Full Picture! I had to read it 4x completely before I made the A1Mo-Gen.

Keep moving forward

Midaz

You can lead a mule to water but you can't make it drink.

[GChilders]

Torque

Hi Gary

As you are only looking for comparative results, not absolute, then a simple windlass arrangement will give you a benchmark between all the motors to be tested.

Hang a spring balance from a fixed object. Tie string or fine gauge magnet wire to the balance and wrap two or three times around the shaft and attach a small weight to the free hanging end to maintain tension in the string/wire.

The wind of the string should be such that the energised motor will increase the load on the balance. The hanging weight does not want to be too heavy otherwise it may stall the motor.

For completeness you could reverse the wind of the string and measure the reduction in load.

It's simple and dirty but probably adequate for the purpose.

Happy Hunting

mark

@mark
I find this an almost worthless measurement for torque. Torque is only really important at acceleration primarily from a stop and secondarily uphill under load. As for stalling a running motor this is worthless imho. Secondly in all of the tests that I have made the single pair of brushes i.e. the motor or the generator side have more torque than the stock goldmine has. When I couple both sets of brushes under power the torque is increased phenomenally and rpm are only modestly increased. The reason you think that the symmetrical arrangement has more torque is because you have a poorly timed motor, with as the saying goes "One hand tied behind its' back." UFO has posted many examples of these motors with all of the pairs of the brushes being used as motor brushes. In the case of the goldmine asymmetric there are two pair of brushes that can be used to power the motor during acceleration, trust me it makes a huge difference in the torque. In your tests I did not see significant amounts of torque in any of the examples. 6 to 8 kilograms of torque, compared to U.S. measurements would only be in the range of 12 to 18 pounds of torque. Secondly torque is not measured in a simple scale. It has to be laid against a measurement pounds per foot, per inch, or kilograms per meter, or centimeter. There has to be lever involved for torque to mean something. When I have finished with the conversion of one of my quads I will publish lbft torque readings and horsepower ratings. I am satisfied with the torque I feel when I grab the shaft on these small motors. I can grab the shaft of the stock goldmine motor with my thumb and forefinger and stall the motor, I cannot do this with the asymmetrical windings. That is enough for me, if it is not satisfactory for you, you will have to wait until I have a motor that I do not want to waste time on. I am planning on large conversions. Larger than a scooter so obviously I want a motor that out performs the symmetrical winding.

Cheers

Garry

[HuntingRoss]

your test results were invalid because the time was incorrect.

Your timing was incorrect on this one also

the end timing(light blue P2 last coil's bisector) is incorrect

There is a heavy reliance upon the word 'incorrect'. It does two things. Firstly it implies that it can be done 'correctly' and secondly it is a futile attempt to elevate the one delivering the remark as being superior to the one receiving it, reinforced by another demeaning remark

we tried to tell you

Now the first image cited as incorrect, the 'All north 3 pole pairs' IS incorrect. The fault was picked up at the time of the original post, an apology was offered by UFO, the motor was re-wound with the correct timing, reported and importantly we all moved on.

The second image cited as incorrect, the 'All north 4 pole pairs' IS NOT incorrect because it can not be corrected as explained at length in my post #7451.

Now. To claim the superior high ground of judgment, it should be immediately obvious to the one doing the judging that the limitations of the 12 pole rotor will not permit the adjustments claimed to improve the performance of the design. Worse. Despite highlighting the uncorrectable limitations of the rotor my supposed superior still protests that the theory

is correct.

And further diminishing any credibility to level discernible criticism at anyones work.

For clarity. The theory is sound. But it's the correct application of theory that makes it worthy of attention. Not the misapplication.

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

Adjusting the timing also involves moving/adjusting the brushes.

You can move and adjust whatever you like. If you don’t understand the basic architecture of a motor and the constraints it presents then theorising achieves nothing.

5' + 120' + *60' = 185' (* just under 185 degrees)

Firing just after the north bisector and releasing just before the south bisector has to be less than 180 degrees. Not more. It’s fundamental to the understanding.

Then try pair SC9 anyway you want, within specs. You will see major differences.

SC9 is a 5 pole lapping pairs configuration “within specs” and it is a very weak motor with virtually no voltage output.

I shall write up my SC8, SC9 and SC5.1 motors one evening soon.

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

EXAMPLE #2

As you can see from the image below, the first coil's timing(dark blue P1 first coil's bisector) is incorrect ( first coil's bisector is before the magnet's bisector).

By adjusting the timing, you should have ALOT better performance!

And I replied :

That image of the motor that you linked was re-wound with the correct timing...you'll remember that UFO apologised for misleading me on the timing mark for the motor.

And you say that it -

should have ALOT better performance!

But it didn't.

Happy Hunting

mark