My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[Ufopolitics]

Refreshing...again.

So let's use the example from before. Replace the small comm (1"radius) with a larger comm (4" radius) and leave the smaller brush which had a contact of 30º on the smaller comm or an arc length of 0.523". Use 1000RPM for both cases.

The smaller comm surface speed is 104.67in/sec. The comm segment actual surface distance would be 0.473" when a .050" mica undercut is considered. The total time of contact between the brush and one comm segment = (0.523"+0.473")/104.67in/sec = 9.5mS.

The larger comm surface speed is 418.67in/sec. The comm segment actual surface distance would be 2.045" using the same .050" undercut. The total time of contact between the brush and one comm segment = (0.523"+2.045")/418.67in/sec = 6.1mS.

The contact duration is shorter on the larger commutator.

This would have negligible effect on torque and speed of the motor, probably unnoticeable.

bi

I really can not tell if you are so retarded for real, or is it your obsession and stubbornness to demonstrate your point, proving me wrong.

So, let me restart/refresh from your previous post above with your results.

Your results, which only means "time of contact" (as you have written above)...trying to translate it to you ...:

It only means the time the brush establishes contact with commutator segment...which is perfect, brilliant, excellent...However, Those results does NOT reflect how many times that "time of contact" REPEATS related to the Main Frame Time from Shaft, and of course commutator which is mounted thereto.

Based on normal and simple logic, no one with a healthy and calmed mind... could think that 6.1 or 9.5 milliseconds where one (1) Second contains One Thousand (1000) Milliseconds...and one (1) minute contains 60,000 milliseconds...is going to represents the repetition value on a shaft and commutator spinning at 1000 Revolutions Per Minute or 16.666 Revolutions Per Second.

So after you did your excellent calculation about "time of contact" between brush-commutator segment ...we need to know now how many times that value (time of contact) repeats within one minute (60 seconds) AND also for one Second of rotation from main shaft...:

First let's convert your results back from milliseconds to seconds:

Case 1- For the 1" radius Commutator (9.5 mS) = 0.0095 seconds

Case 2- For the 4" radius Commutator (6.1 mS) = 0.0061 seconds

For One (1) Second of Rotation...:

Case 1 (r=1"comm) = (1.0 Sec/0.0095 Sec)=105.26

Case 2 (r=4" comm) = (1.0 Sec/0.0061 Sec)=163.93

So, on the four inches radius commutator, the time of contact REPEATS around Sixty (60) times MORE than for the Case 1, or one inch radius commutator...and that is ONLY for One(1) second of rotation.

Now, One Minute has Sixty Seconds right?...so then:

For One (1) Minute of Rotation:

Case 1- 1" Radius= 1 minute= 60 Sec/0.0095 Sec= 6,315.79

Case 2- 4" Radius= 1 minute= 60 Sec/0.0061 Sec= 9,836.06

So, in one minute the 4" commutator segment establishes contact with brush roughly around 3520 more than the one inch commutator...

Now that is a big time difference between those two different diameter commutators...considering some motor applications stay operating for very long periods of time.

Not that "unnoticeable" now right?

Now I am resting this case here Bistander, it is completely up to you to keep refuting you are completely wrong...but you will be doing it by yourself


To me it is the end of this non sense argument.


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

I really can not tell if you are so retarded for real, or is it your obsession and stubbornness to demonstrate your point, proving me wrong.

So, let me restart/refresh from your previous post above with your results.

Your results, which only means "time of contact" (as you have written above)...trying to translate it to you ...:

It only means the time the brush establishes contact with commutator segment...which is perfect, brilliant, excellent...However, Those results does NOT reflect how many times that "time of contact" REPEATS related to the Main Frame Time from Shaft, and of course commutator which is mounted thereto.

Based on normal and simple logic, no one with a healthy and calmed mind... could think that 6.1 or 9.5 milliseconds where one (1) Second contains One Thousand (1000) Milliseconds...and one (1) minute contains 60,000 milliseconds...is going to represents the repetition value on a shaft and commutator spinning at 1000 Revolutions Per Minute or 16.666 Revolutions Per Second.

So after you did your excellent calculation about "time of contact" between brush-commutator segment ...we need to know now how many times that value (time of contact) repeats within one minute (60 seconds) AND also for one Second of rotation from main shaft...:

First let's convert your results back from milliseconds to seconds:

Case 1- For the 1" radius Commutator (9.5 mS) = 0.0095 seconds

Case 2- For the 4" radius Commutator (6.1 mS) = 0.0061 seconds

For One (1) Second of Rotation...:

Case 1 (r=1"comm) = (1.0 Sec/0.0095 Sec)=105.26

Case 2 (r=4" comm) = (1.0 Sec/0.0061 Sec)=163.93

So, on the four inches radius commutator, the time of contact REPEATS around Sixty (60) times MORE than for the Case 1, or one inch radius commutator...and that is ONLY for One(1) second of rotation.

Now, One Minute has Sixty Seconds right?...so then:

For One (1) Minute of Rotation:

Case 1- 1" Radius= 1 minute= 60 Sec/0.0095 Sec= 6,315.79

Case 2- 4" Radius= 1 minute= 60 Sec/0.0061 Sec= 9,836.06

So, in one minute the 4" commutator segment establishes contact with brush roughly around 3520 more than the one inch commutator...

Now that is a big time difference between those two different diameter commutators...considering some motor applications stay operating for very long periods of time.

Not that "unnoticeable" now right?

Now I am resting this case here Bistander, it is completely up to you to keep refuting you are completely wrong...but you will be doing it by yourself


To me it is the end of this non sense argument.


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufopolotics,

Great example of what I call bad math. You also have a habit of bad English when it comes to singular and plural. So right now it is unclear what you are attempting to calculate. For a 1 second duration, you come to the conclusion of 105.26 and 163.93. What are the units for those numbers? What do they represent? The same question for a 1 minute duration. What are the units for 6,315.79 and 9836.06?

Those numbers can't be the number of times a comm segment encounters a particular brush. It is obvious that is defined by the 1000RPM, so it is 1000 times per minute or 16.7 times per second, for any diameter commutator.

From post #7917 I calculated that for a 1" radius and a 4" radius commutator the segment time of engagement with a brush is 9.5mS and 6.1mS respectively for each revolution at a 1000RPM. So, if you want to know the total time the brush contacts that segment per minute, you just multiply the rotational speed times the contact time per revolution.

9.5mS per revolution times 1000RPM = 9.5seconds per minute or 15.8%.

6.1mS per revolution times 1000RPM = 6.1seconds per minute or 10.1%.

9.5mS per revolution times 16.7 revolutions per second = 158mS per second or 15.8%.

6.1mS per revolution times 16.7 revolutions per second = 101mS per second or 10.1%.

These percentages represent the fraction of time that the particular commutator segment touches a certain brush while rotating at 1000RPM. These percentages would hold for any speed above zero with the specified size commutator and brush.

*The difference of contact time between the 4" and 1" commutators would be the fraction of the percentages. 10.1% divided by 15.8% = 64%. So the contact time for the larger comm segment with that brush is 64% of the time of the contact using the smaller com. The same percentage you get when you divide 6.1mS by 9.5mS.

Seems simple to me. But maybe I am just too old fashion to comprehend your math. If so, please continue your explanation so I might learn.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

The final conclusion here is that you have previously ONLY calculated the On Time, but not the frequency or REPETITION it takes place during the TIME the rotational speed develops.

So, based on an incomplete result you drew all kind of wrong conclusions.

I am not wasting any more time here.


write whatever you please...be my guest.

[Ufopolitics]

@Citfta/Bistander...

@Citfta/Bistander...

By the way, you are so obvious, it really pops out like some sort of huge Tongue...

My last contact with your second identity, Citfta was more than a week ago (10-06-15), and now that original post from Citfta is gone, deleted...am glad I quoted it...

However, yesterday, after my discussion with you as Bistander here...you logged in as Citfta and made a post against me all the sudden... in the Thread Citfta has created...that was so stupid from your end.

Then you log in again as Bistander to write the stupid comment below, so stupidly trying to make up wordings and expressions denoting a different "accent" none of your two characters uses...:

(to Citfta...)...I wondered what happened to you. I'll be sorry to see you leave. Did you notice on his million veiw thread he is claiming you and I are one in the same? Oh well. Ya gotta do what you gotta do. Good luck and God bless.

bi

You are so ridiculous.

So now that your dual identities have been blown out, Burnt, exposed yesterday by me...then now you have decided to kill Citfta, sending it to another Forum...?


That was so ridiculous, so stupid, and so obvious...your personality is just like that wall across the road...

Do you really believe people here are stupid?

Go somewhere else to post, not here...neither Citfta or Bistander are welcome here...so, if you want to keep addressing me, try another identity.

[dR-Green]

Do you really believe people here are stupid?

Do you?

...

[bistander]

The final conclusion here is that you have previously ONLY calculated the On Time, but not the frequency or REPETITION it takes place during the TIME the rotational speed develops.

So, based on an incomplete result you drew all kind of wrong conclusions.

I am not wasting any more time here.


write whatever you please...be my guest.

frequency or REPETITION is 1000RPM.

So, in one minute the 4" commutator segment establishes contact with brush roughly around 3520 more than the one inch commutator...

Think about what you are saying. 3520 more times per minute. It is only turning at 1000 revolutions per minute. How can it encounter a single stationary brush 9836 times per minute?

It would appear that you have difficulty understanding how many revolutions are in a RPM.

[Ufopolitics]

Do you?

...

Who called You here?


Do You also need attention that desperately?...

Nobody pays attention anymore to your little light bulbs turning on so dimly while hooked to such complex coils and winding's...

Plus all those boring comments from old Tesla's books?

[bistander]

@Citfta/Bistander...

By the way, you are so obvious, it really pops out like some sort of huge Tongue...

My last contact with your second identity, Citfta was more than a week ago (10-06-15), and now that original post from Citfta is gone, deleted...am glad I quoted it...

However, yesterday, after my discussion with you as Bistander here...you logged in as Citfta and made a post against me all the sudden... in the Thread Citfta has created...that was so stupid from your end.

Then you log in again as Bistander to write the stupid comment below, so stupidly trying to make up wordings and expressions denoting a different "accent" none of your two characters uses...:

Originally Posted by bistander View Post
to Citfta...I wondered what happened to you. I'll be sorry to see you leave. Did you notice on his million veiw thread he is claiming you and I are one in the same? Oh well. Ya gotta do what you gotta do. Good luck and God bless.

bi

You are so ridiculous.

So now that your dual identities have been blown out, Burnt, exposed yesterday by me...then now you have decided to kill Citfta, sending it to another Forum...?


That was so ridiculous, so stupid, and so obvious...your personality is just like that wall across the road...

Do you really believe people here are stupid?

Go somewhere else to post, not here...neither Citfta or Bistander are welcome here...so, if you want to keep addressing me, try another identity.

I'll quote this post to save it but really have no comment.

[dR-Green]

Who called You here?


Do You also need attention that desperately?...

Nobody pays attention anymore to your little light bulbs turning on so dimly while hooked to such complex coils and winding's...

Plus all those boring comments from old Tesla's books?

I'll take that as a yes.

[scratchrobot]

This thread is going on for 3 years, people wasting time and money building motors because one person says he knows how to get free energy, imagine how much energy is wasted running all these motors all those years

I do think people here are stupid.

[sampojo]

Small motor work

Been working on some small motors for RC modelling. Planning to make exact comparisons in performance. Figure I can do timed runs and some endurance type runs. First I will do exact impedance matching between the Edison style motors and the Asym. I have decided that is the great leveler for performance comparisons.

First on deck is my 1/24th scale RS Xmod. I have 2 rear ends. The stock motor is 1.8ohm. I will replace one motor with an asym 3pole. I have one bruxh plate constructed, using bearings too. Brushes need rotated 90deg. The asym motor casing and rotor are in the middle with various other motors I have obtained for components. I need to get 11' of 32ga wire on each pole to get 1.8ohms into the asym motor. Seems that the stock motors around 1 ohm have some room... winding soon.

Seems the cheapo motors I got were using .6-.7 ohms, 6' wire per rotor, and at .0089" diameter wire, makes it using 30ga. So Perfect for going up to 32ga, and going to longer wire to get get 1.8 ohms, should easily fit on the rotor with the extra room that was showing on those Edison rotors.



The motor with the lowest resistance (0.7ohm) runs on a 6v battery pack at 36000+ rpm! wow. Draws down the voltage to 4.5v.

Got an RC plane too, and 3 A/C 380 size motors



This aircraft may have a 480 motor in it. I am hoping it is only an armature resistance difference since the physical dimensions look the same. I believe they are 5-pole motors.

Yep, the first flight I crashed it good, had some repairs to do.

[jazzzyro]

UFO Motor conversion - adding the secondary connectors and modifying the shell

Hi UFO,
First of all, A BIG THANK YOU! You are doing a fantastic job and a GREAT GIFT to all mankind. I really appreciate a lot your altruism!

Second, I want to start immediately a replication of your work, but I'm a little confused about how to add and FIX the secondary contactors, as well as the modification of the outer shell of motor.

Can you post photos/videos about these details? I guess it would help many people.

Thanks a lot!

Warm regards,
Jazzy

[SisMika]

make paper airplanes

jazzzyro, you would be better off making paper airplanes. This thread is a wast of time and money. Since you haven't even gotten any response it should be obvious to you that the claims made at the beginning of this thread are false. The pretend guru that started this thread is now off pretending he knows something about making magnet motors. Why does he need a magnet motor if his great motor works as he claimed? Ask yourself that question. If he knows so much about magnet motors why hasn't he shown one that works. Just more false claims from a guy that puts everyone else down if they dare to disagree with him about his ideas.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,
First of all, A BIG THANK YOU! You are doing a fantastic job and a GREAT GIFT to all mankind. I really appreciate a lot your altruism!

Second, I want to start immediately a replication of your work, but I'm a little confused about how to add and FIX the secondary contactors, as well as the modification of the outer shell of motor.

Can you post photos/videos about these details? I guess it would help many people.

Thanks a lot!

Warm regards,
Jazzy

Hello and thanks Jazzzyro!

You will have to give me more details about your motor to be modified...like length of stator's housing and length of rotor assembly. Some motors have a pretty long casing that don't need much modification...others don't...so you have to measure the armature/rotor length versus the casing length and see if shaft will allow for the second commutator.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

jazzzyro, you would be better off making paper airplanes. This thread is a wast of time and money. Since you haven't even gotten any response it should be obvious to you that the claims made at the beginning of this thread are false. The pretend guru that started this thread is now off pretending he knows something about making magnet motors. Why does he need a magnet motor if his great motor works as he claimed? Ask yourself that question. If he knows so much about magnet motors why hasn't he shown one that works. Just more false claims from a guy that puts everyone else down if they dare to disagree with him about his ideas.

And WHO ARE YOU?
Where did you land from?

Have I ever seen YOU here before replicating at least the smallest motor?

Nope, nope and nope...

Only stupid people like you come here to criticize and vomit your poison and stinking waste...which is the simplest part of all...not building like others do.

I decided to build a magnetic motor just because I like to do so ...SO WHAT?

I like to build as many things I decide to and can afford to, simple...and whoever don't like it...well the door is open.

This Motors are NOT a failure, they are just Motors that could have many, many options/possibilities to be put together, and is up to the imagination/knowledge/capacity of the builder to make it happen successfully or to be a failure...simple.

I can not and will not pretend that a 100% of replications would be a success.

On a final note...I have NOT abandoned this Thread at all, I just discover something that will change forever the way we look at the main roots, the basic fundamentals that rule every single Electrodynamic Machine in the World...MAGNETISM, and that includes this motors of course. BUT mainly most of the required work goes to Generators, which are the weakest, and worst part of all this branch about Development of this Energetic Machines, and SO, that is the MAIN AREA where I am working on now.

Capisci?