My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[HuntingRoss]

Torque Tests

As promised for completeness. The figures for the single comm earth/ground shaft build -

Using 0.425mm wire @ 0.121 ohm/m

12 groups
3 coils per group
15 turns per coil
All earthed to the shaft at the bottom of the groups

I didn't do a resistance test per se but did a calculation based on metres used per group which is 5.2m giving approx 0.63 ohms.

Connection this time was via both wires using the body as the output.

10.34v PSU no load
10.26v @ 1.04A @ 2280 rpm with 4.74v output.
Stall amps approx 5.6A

5.39v PSU no load
5.16v @ 0.92A @ 1080 rpm with 2.64v output.
Stall amps approx 3.4A

For comparison. The OEM motor.

10.3v @ 1.18A @ 1546 rpm.
I couldn't pinch the shaft tightly enough to stall. Amps was 7A and rising.

5.22v @ 1.18A @ 763 rpm.
Stall amps approx 5.9A

--S--

The test today was to rig for measuring torque. It's rough and ready and serves as comparison between all 3 motors.

The arm that I fabricated weighs 175g with the centre of mass 10mm from the shaft centre. Close enough that I discounted the arm from the calculations.

The principle for operation was to manually support the arm perpendicular to the ground (floor) with the balance suspended from the arm and tethered to the ground. Switch the motor on and the balance would record the load applied by the stalled motor. The initial reading drops then stabilises, where, after 2 seconds the balance 'locks' and records the stable result.

24v Battery (from scooter)

OEM. 1.125kg @ 100mm [0.1125 kgm = 1.10 Nm]
Single comm. 0.355kg @ 100mm [0.0355 kgm = 0.348 Nm]
Beast (2 comm). 0.610kg @ 100mm [0.061 kgm = 0.598 Nm]

The OEM is rated at 0.42 Nm @ 2500 rpm...not 1.10 Nm. What ever the reason for the discrepancy, for a baseline test the OEM has almost twice the torque of the Beast and four times the Single Comm.

Keep hunting

mark

[IMG]URL=http://s652.photobucket.com/user/huntingross/media/IMG_2762.jpg.html][/URL][/IMG]
Pic of the copper collar at the base of the single comm motor.

[IMG]URL=http://s652.photobucket.com/user/huntingross/media/IMG_2764.jpg.html][/URL][/IMG]
Pic of arm in fabrication.

[IMG]URL=http://s652.photobucket.com/user/huntingross/media/IMG_2766.jpg.html][/URL][/IMG]
Pic of motor mounting bracket with arm attached to shaft.

[IMG]URL=http://s652.photobucket.com/user/huntingross/media/IMG_2768.jpg.html][/URL][/IMG]
Pic of all 3 motors for testing.

[Midaztouch]

[IMG][/IMG]

Hi Mark,

Good morning in Japan and good evening in the states.

Looking at the comm connection in your diagram, ONLY G2 is energized... Move the G2 timing forward 2 segments. The G2 coil1 would fire slightly after the north stator bi-sector.

Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[Midaztouch]

Lightworker

Thank you for your vid. I see you put a lot of effort, time and planning in your setup. Could you explain why you connected capacitors to your motor winding?


Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[iankoglin]

Hello My Dear Friend UFO, Great Team, Ladies and Gentlemen.
Let me present Part 1 YouTube Video about
Replication of UFOPOLITICS Asymmetric Dual Pentagon Y Wind 5 Pole Motor

Replication of UFOPOLITICS Asymmetric Dual Pentagon Y 5 Pole Motor by Lightworker1xxx - YouTube

Thanks for watching

Warmest Regards to All

lightworker

G'Day Light
I really enjoyed your setup it's been a lot of work in the making and easy to see all the parameters I cant wait to get back into my projects so as to finish them
Kindest Regards
Kogs

[HuntingRoss]

Set your G2 timing back/ccw 2 poles or just move the comm connection forward/cw 2 segments... The amps will be higher but by how much? And is the torque significantly stronger?

Hi Midaz

I wish I had checked in this morning and seen your post...

I decided for completeness and the interests of science to chop my 'quick and dirty' for a proper build. I have now built and tested that motor but will not report the results just yet as I would like to add to my data, my first attempts at torque testing the motors I now have littered on my table.

If I'm understanding your request, the G1 Coil 1 would be just above the north bisector and the G2 Coil 1 would be just below the north bisector on that diagram ?

If that is correct, it would be a simple task to jump the comm connections 2 segments CW once I have done my tests tomorrow...and hopefully add a torque test for this arrangement too.

regards

mark

[Lightworker1]

Replication of UFOPOLITICS Asymmetric Dual Pentagon Y 5 Pole Motor by Lightworker1xxx

Hello My Dear Friend UFO, Great Team, Ladies and Gentlemen.
Let me present Part 1 YouTube Video about
Replication of UFOPOLITICS Asymmetric Dual Pentagon Y Wind 5 Pole Motor

Replication of UFOPOLITICS Asymmetric Dual Pentagon Y 5 Pole Motor by Lightworker1xxx - YouTube

Thanks for watching

Warmest Regards to All

lightworker

[Midaztouch]

[IMG][/IMG]

Mark,

Since your diagram is accurate, could you try your "quick and dirty" test like this? Set your G2 timing back/ccw 2 poles or just move the comm connection forward/cw 2 segments... The amps will be higher but by how much? And is the torque significantly stronger?


Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[HuntingRoss]

Are the comm segments accurate to the pole settings in your above diagram?

Hi Midaz

Yes. The comm segments align with the slots.

Regards

mark

[Midaztouch]

Mark

Are the comm segments accurate to the pole settings in your above diagram?

Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[HuntingRoss]

What image displays your pole setting accurately or did you made an accurate image of your set up?

Hi Midaz

The image above is the current set up and differs from my original image only by the fact that I progressed the first coil by one pole CCW.

regards

mark

[HuntingRoss]

A little confused

Thanks UFO for the appraisal of the one comm motor. I figured there would be some down side...just not such a large one. If this avenue has already been explored without much success it is better to stop than carry on.

CORRECTION/EDIT 1: Mark, on your Diagram you are fully connected through motor brush/Comm Element to G2, not to G1...therefore, You MUST go by G2 Bisectors positioning and NOT by G1 Bisectors. Your Machine there is on very high Attraction Mode.

I'm a little confused on the timing now. I thought I understood it...but now, not so much.

I understood it to be this - As G1 comm is coming onto the brush the G1 Coil 1 bisector had to be passed the north magnet bisector. This was my first timing diagram.

The diagram above has moved the G1 Coil 1 bisector one pole CCW as the G1 comm is coming on to the brush. This, I thought, reduced the amps.

Returning then, to the 'beast'...It seems to function very well on the table but not on the road with no apparent reason or solution.

regards

mark

[Midaztouch]

UFO

Why do we need to use the attract mode with NN? When we made the N/S pairs, we use repulsion only. The torque and RPM were very high.

Just by the nature of the NN, the coil length would be shorter with the same amount of turns. And we could set the coil density closer to the stator bisector.

Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[Ufopolitics]

One Comm Asymmetry...

Hi Midaz

Thank you for your questions.

When I connected my two comm motor to simulate a one comm arrangement by connecting the two bottom brushes together, I got the same performance with the same output also. Which begged the question - can we build a asym motor with one comm if we tie off the bottom wires to the shaft...the answer appears to be 'yes' unless I misunderstand some principles at play. This demonstrates the benefits of the asym motor allied with a simpler build. After all, it seems to me that unless people are prepared to build their own motors they're not going to get them any other way. These are not going to appear in your local hobby shop for example.

And...in the spirit of invention...it considers something which doesn't seem to have been considered (although I'm certain I have seen a photo of a similar build). Are any 'losses' in this design outweighed by the advantages ? And what are the 'losses' if any ?

I hope to find out.

Hello Mark,

I will tell you about this differences...and if you go back I had some long debate with a Member from Brazil related to the One Commutator structure, the only difference is that He , before even trying just one simple and small replication of the real two commutator structure, he jumped directly into this type of build.

Now Mark, you did great with your Typical Asymmetric Replication, except for the inconvenience of Road testing... so, there is a big difference here from previous Member I mentioned above, now, you can do as you please trying different set ups, like you have said, in the benefit of Science, Research and Development of an Open Source Material displayed here...to test different options and see if it does or does not work as well as the original design, following up and keep informing Us how it is doing.

The problems I see with the one commutator is that Coils, Pairs or Groups never have a complete "idle time" or off time, a brake...since Input Negative (bottom) will always be connected to Positive Output Coils (also on bottom end when using two commutators)...Radiant Energy will never be entering-assisting your Machine at Off Times Coils, Natural Reversal. And this is considering you are Inputting from normal top Positive and Negative through Bottom common or ground shaft...Now, if you will Input from both Top Terminals (Positive Input and Negative Output), ignoring/not connecting common shaft ground...then you have something very close to a typical Symmetrical Machine, except that Coils are NOT in COMPLETE series between ALL rotor Coils, but, by sequences of mating Pairs/Groups connecting through comm elements apart by 180º (in your case of two brushes, two stators...and 90º in Four Brush-Four Stators Systems).

Now, there is a big difference, when you use Two Commutators Structure and bridge-joint rear terminals through a wire from brush to brush...if you analyze this set up, there are just MOMENTARY shorting-connection between mating Coils, during time contacting brushes ONLY, after braking contact they go free and next mating Coils enters in.

On smaller number of Coils-Groups Machines there may not be a big difference, except when working on applications that require long operating hours...then that 'only/single' commutator will get really hot...and so the non stopping coils IF you are trying to collect and use the returned energy from the Output end.

And there are also some positive results on other members here long back...they were able to light up LED lamps and recharge small batteries through that Negative Input/Positive reversed Output at shaft/ground...you may want to try that...

In response to UFO's post http://www.energeticforum.com/266307-post7164.html I moved the timing of my all North build to see if it offered any advantages. On this 'quick and dirty' build it seems to work OK although I can't comment on torque and amps as I have too few wires in the coil. Unless I misunderstood that post, we are aiming for the 'sweet spot' somewhere around the bisector of the two magnets and adjust back towards the north bisector to suit our particular performance requirements...ie. torque vs amps.

I'm going to re-wire this motor at the weekend to see if I can fit 20 turns per coil (all north) and judge its performance against the 'beast' (2 comm asym motor) and the OEM (1 comm sym motor).

Best regards

mark

That is correct Midaz, it is like a "Neutral Position" where Mark is timing his machine at...right between both stators center......and it should draw much less amps there. From that point on towards South He would be timing it towards a higher Attraction Mode...decreasing to even more amps...but sacrificing power/torque and speed.

CORRECTION/EDIT 1: Mark, on your Diagram you are fully connected through motor brush/Comm Element to G2, not to G1...therefore, You MUST go by G2 Bisectors positioning and NOT by G1 Bisectors. Your Machine there is on very high Attraction Mode.


Kind Regards to both.


Ufopolitics

[Midaztouch]

Hi Mark

There is a difference between the 3 images that UFO posted. The first image is different from the last two, 2 & 3 images. The poles are set differently. What image displays your pole setting accurately or did you made an accurate image of your set up?

Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[HuntingRoss]

Single comm asym motor

We haven't used one comm. What are you trying to demonstrate?

Hi Midaz

Thank you for your questions.

When I connected my two comm motor to simulate a one comm arrangement by connecting the two bottom brushes together, I got the same performance with the same output also. Which begged the question - can we build a asym motor with one comm if we tie off the bottom wires to the shaft...the answer appears to be 'yes' unless I misunderstand some principles at play. This demonstrates the benefits of the asym motor allied with a simpler build. After all, it seems to me that unless people are prepared to build their own motors they're not going to get them any other way. These are not going to appear in your local hobby shop for example.

And...in the spirit of invention...it considers something which doesn't seem to have been considered (although I'm certain I have seen a photo of a similar build). Are any 'losses' in this design outweighed by the advantages ? And what are the 'losses' if any ?

I hope to find out.

From your diagram, the max density is at the bolt. That would make the motor very weak. Instead of using the lap winding, try using NN pairs. Set the bisector of the coil closer to the Stator bisector.

In response to UFO's post http://www.energeticforum.com/266307-post7164.html I moved the timing of my all North build to see if it offered any advantages. On this 'quick and dirty' build it seems to work OK although I can't comment on torque and amps as I have too few wires in the coil. Unless I misunderstood that post, we are aiming for the 'sweet spot' somewhere around the bisector of the two magnets and adjust back towards the north bisector to suit our particular performance requirements...ie. torque vs amps.

I'm going to re-wire this motor at the weekend to see if I can fit 20 turns per coil (all north) and judge its performance against the 'beast' (2 comm asym motor) and the OEM (1 comm sym motor).

Best regards

mark