My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[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]

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]

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.

[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

[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

[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

[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

[Ufopolitics]

Wedges Part #

@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

Hey Garry, sure friend!

The EIS Part# is WGEDMD20-16-11

Sorry about giving the size in mm previously, I measure them myself, I love metric rather than U.S System...EIS have them in inches though, that is why you couldn't find it...

Wish the best in your coming tests!


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

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

Hello Mark,

I must say you are a funny guy...made me laugh about your comments...

Now, related to the four poles... I am really sorry to say this....but I think you are calculating the bisectors at wrong positioning...or something else ...I made this CAD below:

[IMG][/IMG]

FOR THE REST, I DID NOT MENTIONED ON DIAGRAM ABOUT THIS BEING FOUR POLES PAIRS ONLY!!...SO ANGLES DOES NOT APPLY "TO ALL" ASYMMETRIC MACHINES...I will fix it tomorrow.

I drew the Magenta lines just as guides every 120º for P1 then the other three lines in Gold for P2 also at 120º (I did not add the angle measurements not to crowd the diagram too much...but trust me they are copies from the magenta)

You are correct about a 12 poles having each 4 poles Coils at 120º ...but I believe you are not considering the bisector being at 60ºat the 5º blue mark...which leaves above the North Stator Bisector around 55º of that upper side of coil...and so on with the other Pair P2...which I did separated by @10º+/- from P1...See how much space is left to reach the limits at attract side?


Take a look at it again friend...


Happy hunting!


Regards


Ufopolitics

[sampojo]

Some thoughts on torque and comparing Edison to Tesla motors.

A lot of questions arise regarding torque and how to compare symmetric and asymmetric motors, and of course Gchilders and Hunting Ross even comparing various asymmetric embodiments. You guys are simply stellar in your efforts.

Torque is obviously a difficult measurement. Gary's and Ufo's annecdotal observations have provided believers solid demonstrations. If we were design engineers in the lab at Baldor or Imperial Motors, all the best equipment would be at our finger tips, in a multi-million dollar facility. Imperial has had a wake up call thanks to Ufo's, Prochiro's and Midaz's efforts there. If they aren't doing anything, their curiosity and creativity is simply lacking.

Since Ufo has clearly cracked N. Tesla's patents and revealed the simple genius of design in isolating coils and come up with the fill-in-the-blank-Tesla-left windings. The result is now motors with NO CEMF. Me and Midaz were hanging around the diyelectric car forum, and those jokers who pretended to understand electric motors could not get it through their thick heads even when I quoted from my US Navy Personnel Manual on electrical systems and such, how CEMF voltage rose with RPM until it matched the battery voltage, opposing it, AND THAT IT WAS A BAD THING. They went on to mystically accept how it was a necessary part of the motor process of converting electricity into motion. Edison, Morgan and Lorentz went a long way in sanitizing the minds of engineers in colleges everywhere in their time and all curiosity regarding motors seems dead.

So of course, preaching to the choir here, a symmetric motor, voltage for work will be battery voltage minus CEMF. Since an Asym motor gets an extra kick at TopDeadCenter, when the coil rolls off the commutator, from Mother Nature's Back EMF on the coil, lets call this Assistive EMF or AEMF. So Vw=Bv+AEMF.

This of course is the secret to the potential of overunity here. Is a coil BEMF from the energy put into the field of the coil by the battery or are we opening a portal to the zero point energy or ether energy field. As a physics major possessing a masters in engineering also, well aware of modern advancements, I know of no absolute way to confirm that the assumption of conventional wisdom can be absolutely demonstrated. Furthermore, Ufo's Post 3132 seem to disprove conventional wisdom. Anytime more energy can be garnered as in an open system, it would actually disprove the conventional wisdom that the rules of conservation of energy apply to the electric motor, as a closed system. The fact that the BEMF occurs in complete isolation from the battery, that its energy is from the battery can actually be viewed as somewhat of a leap of faith...

This difference of a plus on one hand vs. a minus on the other is quite a huge difference, as big as it gets mathematically. Anyway, a symm motor has its max torque at zero rpm, topping out when friction and CEMF forces are equal and opposite to battery power. In an asymm motor, torque will be constant as provided from the battery voltage, but most likely increasing as AEMF increases with rpm, and then rpm will only stabilize when friction equals energy generated by Vbatt + AEMF.

Therefore simple comparisons of max rpm's at matching input voltages in my analysis is a very good test. But the only way any motors can be truly compared is that they match in their general composition and they're both designed to run at roughly the some max voltage in continuous operation without melting down. In other words best vs. best, until someone puts a team of engineers on it with millions in funding.

As we know Ufo has always recommended packing the rotors with as much copper as possible. Until I opened my Baldor motor, I had never seen a totally packed OEM rotor. Of course an OEM motor was designed for a certain task, and to have put more copper in it would probably be a waste of money for the job it was built to do. Or they use a fan in the motor to force air through the rotor, and they leave the rotor's partly empty to allow air flow. This may be a weakness in the design of Edison motors as Ufo constantly points out how the coils in his motors rests and cools until next firing. So be it, then, that would be a limiting factor in comparisons, advantage asym. But if the original motor rotor was designed weak for the application, and the asym motor is maxed out that would not be a good comparison. We should keep an eye out for this condition in our comparisons.

Great work, men! Keep it up.

Sam

[Ufopolitics]

Hello UFO.

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'.

Happy Hunting

mark

Hello Mark,


I am going through all this clarification in hope that maybe the issue you are having with Asymmetrical Testing being a Failure lies on this confusion of the timing angles.

Here is a better (and prettier... ) image for your set-up of 12 poles rotor...

And let me say this...this particular rotor configuration I have many of them, they were actually the original Torque-Master utilized as Starter Motor for R/C Gas Helicopters, which I happen to have an old C-30 Heli. I have played with this particular structure a lot in the Asymmetric world, this was one of the very first "Star of David" winding...as it also could be wound with just Three Single Coils at 120º...a crazy machine!

Anyways, here it is:

[IMG][/IMG]


Take a good look at it, First note that all interactions are taking place mostly on the 'Southern' hemisphere of both Stators, at exactly 180º....So, this our 'limit' as well.

Let´s put it simple, from Bisector of P1 Coil 1 to Bisector of P1 Coil 2 We have 120º...right?

I have rotated P1 relative to P2 at exactly 10º, shown on right upper ´hemisphere´(between magenta and gold lines)

Then We can conclude that from P1C2 Bisector to P2C2 Bisector (Disconnecting Line) is a difference of Ten Degrees (10º)

Adding 60º (1/2 of P1C1) + 60º(1/2 of P1C2)+ 10º (difference between Pairs)=130º which is the TOTAL Angle from both Bisector to Bisector ON, taking place at Southern Hemisphere of Stators, whenever two adjacent commutator elements (upper-lower of course) are contacting upper-lower brushes.

Meaning, You have left 45º to play with timing (green arrows at right), well not so...let´s look in more detail:

The closer you get to the 20º into South Stator, the lower the amp draw, but the weaker on torque and RPM´s...so, the sweet spot should be located somewhere in between the 20º limit line and starting 45º line (or between 130ºend line to start line of 20º which is exactly 25º to find your sweet spot.


Hope this clears your confusion friend


Regards


Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

A lot of questions arise regarding torque and how to compare symmetric and asymmetric motors

All very nicely put Sam. I have given up trying to do time consuming 'absolute torque' tests favouring instead the quick and dirty indicative tests...the tether test shows a weak motor quickly and accordingly can be disregarded from the search for optimum performance.

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

Hello Mark,

I must say you are a funny guy...made me laugh about your comments...

Now, related to the four poles... I am really sorry to say this....but I think you are calculating the bisectors at wrong positioning...or something else ...I made this CAD below:

[IMG][/IMG]

FOR THE REST, I DID NOT MENTIONED ON DIAGRAM ABOUT THIS BEING FOUR POLES PAIRS ONLY!!...SO ANGLES DOES NOT APPLY "TO ALL" ASYMMETRIC MACHINES...I will fix it tomorrow.

I drew the Magenta lines just as guides every 120º for P1 then the other three lines in Gold for P2 also at 120º (I did not add the angle measurements not to crowd the diagram too much...but trust me they are copies from the magenta)

You are correct about a 12 poles having each 4 poles Coils at 120º ...but I believe you are not considering the bisector being at 60ºat the 5º blue mark...which leaves above the North Stator Bisector around 55º of that upper side of coil...and so on with the other Pair P2...which I did separated by @10º+/- from P1...See how much space is left to reach the limits at attract side?

Thanks UFO, I wish I had access to CAD at home to bash out a nifty schematic to illustrate my point...but alas.

Now I am willing to admit there exists the possibility that I'm wrong, but I shall try to express this in words and maybe knock out a sketch later as an image.

The brush face is the width of the comm, therefore they are both 30º wide.
The angle between P1 and P2 is 30º (360º/12 poles)
The angle between P1 just about to connect and having just disconnected is 60º. If we call this 55º, then P1 has just connected and has fully disconnected. So.

P1 is coming on to the comm with P1C1 bisector at 5º past the north stator bisector (NSB). P1C2 bisector is 125º past the NSB.
P1 advances 55º and just fully disconnected from the comm. P1C2 is now 180º (125º + 55º) past the NSB.

According to your schematic that is 20º too late.

I can't make the math permit the 4 pole pairs to be configured 'correctly' despite the Team Spokesman chanting the mantra.

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

Hi UFO

I don't know how I missed your post #7472 before I wrote my response above...but (regrettably) I count P1 on the comm for 55º from just connecting to fully disconnecting.

That makes P1C2 energised from 125º past the NSB to 180º past NSB.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

Thanks UFO, I wish I had access to CAD at home to bash out a nifty schematic to illustrate my point...but alas.

Mark, you could download Draft Sight, from that link, which is free of charge and excellent software, I have it as well as Auto CAD

Now I am willing to admit there exists the possibility that I'm wrong, but I shall try to express this in words and maybe knock out a sketch later as an image.

Mark, no matter if I misled you by giving you that center arrow between Pairs...even though, right after I repaired the "damage"...I was trying to get a common 'convention point' to align timing on this motors...but hey, I was wrong, We can NOT do that...But it does not means I ignored that each coil has its bisectors right at center of its geometry.

[IMG][/IMG]

However, in ANY part of Asymmetrical Machines you keep ON, A NORTH COIL PAST the SOUTH Bisector, because that is going to do just like stepping on the brakes pedal all the way to the firewall of your car.

And that is Exactly what you are doing in your CAD over My CAD in above Image.

You are keeping P2 ON PAST South Bisector...that is a no, no, nope...never do that!

Plus, your Model have Dual Rotors attached together...plus Double set of Stators...so your "brakes" were just like the Brembo used on a 250+MPH Enzo Ferrari...made of carbon fiber discs and carbon fiber pads...plus vacuum and electrical assisted...

The brush face is the width of the comm, therefore they are both 30º wide.
The angle between P1 and P2 is 30º (360º/12 poles)
The angle between P1 just about to connect and having just disconnected is 60º. If we call this 55º, then P1 has just connected and has fully disconnected. So.

P1 is coming on to the comm with P1C1 bisector at 5º past the north stator bisector (NSB). P1C2 bisector is 125º past the NSB.
P1 advances 55º and just fully disconnected from the comm. P1C2 is now 180º (125º + 55º) past the NSB.

According to your schematic that is 20º too late.

Mark, let me ask you this...on your CAD, did you made that rotor and commutator/elements plus Coils into a Group, plus center align and ROTATE IT related to Brushes and Stators?...Only then., only IF You rotate this CAD's Rotor You will be able to catch all other coming interactions almost like in reality.

I can't make the math permit the 4 pole pairs to be configured 'correctly' despite the Team Spokesman chanting the mantra.

Happy Hunting

mark

Mark, take a look at picture below...


[IMG][/IMG]

Above is a BRAND NEW CAD, I just finished, based on REAL 30º separated poles.

How come I can make it perfectly well there my friend?...

Download that CAD link I gave you...maybe there is something wrong with the other program you were using...I don't know.


And by the way friend, this is not a Theory...did you read about all my 12 Poles TORQUE MASTER on my previous post?


I think I am starting to realize why were your testing failures caused by...


Take care


Ufopolitics