Interesting Motor

[citfta]

I have been studying the drawings and information you have posted. I have a couple of questions if you don't mind. In the drawing right above this post are the two areas of red in the slots of the armature just one coil or is that two separate coils. Also when you connect up the other half of the case are you using one set of two brushes or are you using four brushes? After rewinding a scooter motor the way Matt Jones shows in the Basic Free Energy Machine thread I have some ideas for different ways to wind the armature but I want to be sure I understand what you are doing first. Also can you explain what you mean by a magnetic short if we don't cut the slot in the case. I think I understand but I like to make sure about those kinds of things.

Thanks for any further info you can share.
Carroll

[mbrownn]

I have been studying the drawings and information you have posted. I have a couple of questions if you don't mind. In the drawing right above this post are the two areas of red in the slots of the armature just one coil or is that two separate coils.

That represents one coil, the black rectangles represent the location of the brushes so you can see how i wound the armature and connected to the commutator.

Also when you connect up the other half of the case are you using one set of two brushes or are you using four brushes?

For the motoring there is one set of brushes as shown in the drawing. A second set of brushes is used for recovery but are not shown on the drawing. The armature winding is the simplest possible, and so results in a lot of inductive kickback, It makes sense to recover it, not onlt because it is useful but because it will burn out the commutator and brushes if we don’t.

After rewinding a scooter motor the way Matt Jones shows in the Basic Free Energy Machine thread I have some ideas for different ways to wind the armature but I want to be sure I understand what you are doing first. Also can you explain what you mean by a magnetic short if we don't cut the slot in the case. I think I understand but I like to make sure about those kinds of things.

Thanks for any further info you can share.
Carroll

Yes by all means try different methods of armature winding, this isn’t about my ego, or me telling others what they can do, Its about finding what works best and getting it out there. You could also use UFO's method but with that you get the advantage of increased output from the armature via transformer action, and the disadvantage of reduced torque. There are many trade-offs to consider when designing motors.

Once we have four coils in the case, flux goes from one set of coils to the other resulting in the armature locking. In this particular drawing it would pass from the 9o'clock position across to the 3o'clock position then return around the case back to the point of origin, missing out the 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock shoes altogether. You can see how there would be no rotary force applied to the armature in this situation. As the return shoes are missed out, I call it a magnetic short.

If you don't want to slot the case just work with two shoes and coils, it will work but you will have much less output compared to the input.

[shylo]

Hi Mbrown, In that last picture showing the lines of flux produced by the field windings , are only 2 being energized?
If all 4 are energized 2 will create a north pole ,the other 2 south correct?
The coil on the armature is wound from 12 o'clock to 6, is this for motoring or generating? (I'm assuming generator)
Your leaving 5 slots empty , wouldn't it work better to only leave 1 or maybe 2 slots empty? Of coarse when the whole generator is wound there won't be any empty slots.
Thanks artv

[citfta]

Hi mbrownn,

Some pieces are beginning to make sense now. Something that surprised me was the amount of torque the modified motor of Matt's design had. His design is in the Free Basic Energy Machine thread started by Turion. Matt has the coils wound around the poles of the armature so that most of the time half of the coil has one voltage being induced in it and the other half has an opposite polarity being induced into it.

I borrowed your picture and drew how he has a single pole of the armature wrapped. See the blue scribbling around one of the poles. In his design he then moves out and continues his wrap with the next poles on each side of the first one. But what would happen if we stopped with just the single pole and connected that coil to the brushes? The pole piece would still get magnetized and be able to be attracted to the proper place but the winding shouldn't get but a very little BEMF generated because all of the coil is moving past the same stator pole. So the wires coming toward us out of the page would have one polarity induced in them but the wires going back into the page would have the opposite polarity. Hence a very low BEMF motor. Does this make sense? I know from working with Matt's motor the torque is much greater than the unmodified motor and it runs much faster on 12 volts than the original motor ran on 24. His motor also draws more current than the unmodified motor but only about twice the original current to gain a lot more torque and speed.

I guess my last question is about the split case. If we wound the coils like I have shown would we still need to split the case? I am thinking we might but you have so much more experience I wanted your opinion about that. Thanks again for being willing to share your hard work.

Carroll

[mbrownn]

Hi mbrownn,

Some pieces are beginning to make sense now. Something that surprised me was the amount of torque the modified motor of Matt's design had. His design is in the Free Basic Energy Machine thread started by Turion. Matt has the coils wound around the poles of the armature so that most of the time half of the coil has one voltage being induced in it and the other half has an opposite polarity being induced into it.

I borrowed your picture and drew how he has a single pole of the armature wrapped. See the blue scribbling around one of the poles. In his design he then moves out and continues his wrap with the next poles on each side of the first one. But what would happen if we stopped with just the single pole and connected that coil to the brushes? The pole piece would still get magnetized and be able to be attracted to the proper place but the winding shouldn't get but a very little BEMF generated because all of the coil is moving past the same stator pole. So the wires coming toward us out of the page would have one polarity induced in them but the wires going back into the page would have the opposite polarity. Hence a very low BEMF motor. Does this make sense? I know from working with Matt's motor the torque is much greater than the unmodified motor and it runs much faster on 12 volts than the original motor ran on 24. His motor also draws more current than the unmodified motor but only about twice the original current to gain a lot more torque and speed.

I guess my last question is about the split case. If we wound the coils like I have shown would we still need to split the case? I am thinking we might but you have so much more experience I wanted your opinion about that. Thanks again for being willing to share your hard work.

Carroll

First I must say that its not really fair to comment too much on Matts design as I haven’t spent any time studying it, nor have I built and tested it, so I will only give you what I think may be the case in relation to what I am doing.

I think Matts design should give quite intense localised magnetic fields which if timed correctly with a commutator or other means will give good torque. I can say this with some confidence because I know the limitations of the standard windings on these motors which are a compromise. These types of Windings that matt is using, if I understand you correctly, are commonly used on other types of motors such as are used RC vehicles and they produce good torque too. The difference being they are on a fixed stator and the magnets are on an external rotor.

If This coil arrangement passed a wide magnetic pole piece, much wider than the coil, it makes sense that the BEMF in the armature will oppose itself on each side of the coil resulting in a low overall BEMF. Sort of self cancelling BEMF. I also suspect that this armature rotates within permanent magnets and not field coils. Permanent magnets are not a part of our electrical circuit so even if there is any sort of EMF created in them its irrelevant.

The motor design I have come up with relies on a large poles on the armature and smaller field poles, sort of the reverse of what I imagine Matts to be. My design prevents BEMF by not allowing the armature pole to pass the smaller field pole when energised, resulting in little chance for BEMF generation. No self cancelling needed, so I believe my design is a true low BEMF design. Im not saying Matt's design inst as good a solution, it is, but his armature would result in high levels of BEMF in the stator coils if placed in my stator. They are not really compatible. I say all this based on your description of someone else’s work, so bare that in mind.

A standard lap winding results in the same cancellation effect as I described before, but it is the sum of the positive and negatives that result in an overall BEMF. Exactly the same thing is happening with the magnetic field of such an armature, overall we get a north at one side and a south at the other but its a compromise. A simple winding such as I propose has a north at one side and a south at the other, no compromise and so a strong field, but it is spread over a greater area compared to Matt's.

Having large poles on the armature gives us a situation where we can have a large sweep angle and not generate much on one part of the pole but something on another part of the pole can generate a lot more. It is a compromise here because smaller poles give stronger generation for the same current.

Splitting the case is an essential part of this design if we want to use both halves.

[citfta]

Yes you are correct. Matt's design is for a motor with permanent magnet stator poles. I hadn't considered yet how that might affect the operation. A lot of things to think about.

Thanks for your input.

Carroll

[mbrownn]

Hi Mbrown, In that last picture showing the lines of flux produced by the field windings , are only 2 being energized?
If all 4 are energized 2 will create a north pole ,the other 2 south correct?
The coil on the armature is wound from 12 o'clock to 6, is this for motoring or generating? (I'm assuming generator)
Your leaving 5 slots empty , wouldn't it work better to only leave 1 or maybe 2 slots empty? Of coarse when the whole generator is wound there won't be any empty slots.
Thanks artv

Referring to this picture http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...-coilsetup-jpg The stator poles at 9 and 3 along with the armature are all in attraction and energised. As there is little magnetic path back from the 3 position to the 9, the flux forms two eddies via the unenergised poles at 12 and 6. Because these flux lines are bent through at acute angle around the armature winding, a torque is applied to the armature. As the flux sweeps across the two coils at 12 and 6 it causes an emf in both these coils.

Note that there is some flux leaking from position 3 back to position 9 as I simulated a small leak path. This clearly shows that any leakage will reduce the efficiency of the motoring and generation.

All the slots have coils, but are open circuit so have no electrical or magnetic effect. Obviously as the armature turns each coil disconnects at the appropriate position and the next coil engages continuing a smooth rotation.

If we choose to omit coils on this armature the gap results in massive transformer actions between the powered and unpowered coils. I dont want to go into that on this thread as this is the DC operation of the machine. I am sure you can guess what machine uses that, but that’s for another thread We can also achieve this effect by having blank segments on the commutator.

[shylo]

Ok I see what your saying , but how do you know if that flux pattern in the picture is accurate?
If the armature is energized would the fields produced not show lines of flux being directed to the 2 unenergized poles (12 & 6 o clock) since they would have no pole?
Path of least resistance?
Also still not sure how your coils are wound, from 12 to 6?
"I'm sure you can guess what machine uses that" I have no idea.

Carroll , you mean something like this? see attached
artv

[mbrownn]

Ok I see what your saying , but how do you know if that flux pattern in the picture is accurate?

Of course that is a simulation and we cant see flux. Much like an oscilloscope gives a representation of voltage, it isn’t actually voltage. Simulations are like that except they are based upon mathematical models and not an input from any energy field. I understand their limitations. The idea of using such a model is to try and understand how it is working. If I increased current on the model it does start to leak flux all over the place. It is a representation from a program that is used by many engineers. The proof of the pudding is that the motor does turn.

If the armature is energized would the fields produced not show lines of flux being directed to the 2 unenergized poles (12 & 6 o clock) since they would have no pole?

If the armature alone is energised the flux just passes from the 12 and 6 poles around the armature coils and back to the 12 and 6 poles, resulting in the armature being magnetically locked in position. There must be a magnetic input from the 3 and 9 o'clock poles for the motor to turn. I believe it is possible to replace the 3 and 9 o'clock poles with permanent magnets although I have not tried it yet.

Path of least resistance?

Yes, you could say the flux follows the path of least resistance.

Also still not sure how your coils are wound, from 12 to 6?

For the 3 and 9 o'clock coils I used standard starter motor field coils. The 12 and 6 o'clock coils were wound in the same direction. I cant say what would be an Ideal number of turns as you would have to adjust this based upon what you are doing with your output. I think 2.5 to 3 times the number of the powered field coils, is a good place to start. Use as large a diameter wire as you can, to keep resistance low and allow high currents.

"I'm sure you can guess what machine uses that" I have no idea.

A certain motor/generator brought back from Germany during WWII. I wont use the common name for it on this thread as this is not that device, and I want to avoid confusion. That device is much more complex in its operation although very similar, in fact almost identical in how it is built. This device is my gift to all, and based on part of what I have learned from reverse engineering that device.

[citfta]

Hi guys,

Shylo that is exactly what I had in mind. Now how did you connect the coils to the commutator? I was studying (daydreaming) about that idea last night and couldn't come up with a good idea for the best way to connect the coils to the commutator. If you have twice the number of commutator segments as pole pieces it would be easy. I am still thinking on that.

Mbrownn thanks for the additional information about the field coils. I thought maybe you were doing something along those lines. I found three of the scooter motors on Ebay for $30 dollars for all of them so I ordered them. I know they have four poles and four brushes. They also have good bearings instead of bushings so that is another plus. And I already know they can be rewound pretty easily without using a lot of wire. They are permanent magnet motors but I am thinking I could remove two of the magnets and replace them with field coils to make it similar to the device you are working on. At least I will have a couple more cheap motors to play around with so if I scrap one it is no big deal.

Do you have a name for your device yet? I think I understand about not wanting to call it the same name as the other device. Shylo I mentioned the name of that device in my thread. And there is a thread on this forum about that device.

When I get my motors I will start modifying one of them and working with it. I think it would be pretty easy to mill out the slots needed because these motors are not too big. I hope they are big enough to get the effect we are looking for. They are rated at 300 watts so maybe that will be big enough to at least see some of the effects you have seen.

Later,
Carroll

[mbrownn]

Mbrownn thanks for the additional information about the field coils. I thought maybe you were doing something along those lines. I found three of the scooter motors on Ebay for $30 dollars for all of them so I ordered them. I know they have four poles and four brushes. They also have good bearings instead of bushings so that is another plus. And I already know they can be rewound pretty easily without using a lot of wire. They are permanent magnet motors but I am thinking I could remove two of the magnets and replace them with field coils to make it similar to the device you are working on. At least I will have a couple more cheap motors to play around with so if I scrap one it is no big deal.

Do you have a name for your device yet? I think I understand about not wanting to call it the same name as the other device. Shylo I mentioned the name of that device in my thread. And there is a thread on this forum about that device.

When I get my motors I will start modifying one of them and working with it. I think it would be pretty easy to mill out the slots needed because these motors are not too big. I hope they are big enough to get the effect we are looking for. They are rated at 300 watts so maybe that will be big enough to at least see some of the effects you have seen.

Later,
Carroll

Your welcome.

Im pleased that you are going to try it with permanent magnets as that is something I haven't done yet. I think your hardest job will be to make good shoes for the generator coils. Another thing to think about is the gap between the magnets and the armature, what effect will that have?

I have a question about the permanent magnets, are the poles along the large faces of the magnet or at each end of the arc? If they are at each end it will not work. You may need to narrow the magnets because of the sweep angle but this can be done with a diamond wheel if you are careful.

Your supply voltage will be different because you have rewound the armature, be careful not to exceed the amp rating. I suggest just a couple of volts during your setup tests.

Getting the brush position correct is critical to making it turn, as it the sweep angle. The sweep angle is the angle the motor turns on one set of commutator bars, If the angle is two big the motor will lock up. The sweep angle can also be limited by the width of the generator shoes, if the shoes are too narrow the motor will lock up. This was a problem another researcher had too.

You wont be experiencing a big drop in BEMF like in a motor with powered field coils, as this is where the lowering of BEMF occurs in my design, but the question is, does the magnet increase the generating effect of the armature on the generator coil? I suspect it could. An electrically exited armature in a generator will produces more output power in the generator coil than is in the armature, that energy comes from the applied torque. See self exciting generators. As the applied torque is coming from a permanent magnet and the armature, will the output of the generator be sufficient to self energise the armature and even self run?

I suspect not, but I think we will be getting closer to that goal. Exciting when you think about it

PS, I never gave it a name so I'm open to suggestions.

[mbrownn]

One small detail I forgot to mention standard wound armatures don't work that well, you need an armature of the simplest design as shown in the simulations. This is one I used.

[shylo]

hi mbrownn, if a generating coil is loaded , it produces an opposite pole to what induced it?( there by causing attraction)= drag
I looped the output of my generator back to input, the rpm went crazy and blew the brushes away.
It's just a matter of bouncing it back and forth, in the right orientation.
The emf is more useful than people think.
What happens when 2 coils of opposite orientation occupy the same space?
They should cancel, but is that what really happens?
Just thinking artv

Carroll, I did about 6 weeks of testing with that ,On the 3BGS it made for longer run times , but in the end it still lost.
Still testing my new gen.

[citfta]

Hi guys,

Been a very busy day so just now got back to the computer. Shylo I like what you did with that rotor. Can you post a picture of the commutator end. I am trying to figure out the best way to connect those coils to the commutator. I have some ideas but I would like to see what you have done if you don't mind.

Since I will be getting 3 of the scooter motors to play with I want to wind one of them like you have done shylo and wind one like mbrownn shows in his drawings. Then maybe that will help me understand better how the different kinds of winds might affect the performance. My motors are supposed to be in Saturday so maybe I can get started soon on trying out some of these ideas.

Mbrownn would you like to call your motor the mbrownn motor? That would work for me. Of course if there are other people that have seriously been working on this same idea they might have a better idea what to call it.

Carroll

[mbrownn]

hi mbrownn, if a generating coil is loaded , it produces an opposite pole to what induced it?( there by causing attraction)= drag

If this is the case then the extra attraction would cause increased torque and speed and so more generation in my design. Look at Fleming's right hand rule for generators, and you can see that this is the case. The problem is the force on the wire coil in the armature is opposite and opposes rotation, so we still have drag. Its a compromise, as many things are on such a device. We reverse the direction of rotation by moving the brushes, but in my tests it did not work as well.

I looped the output of my generator back to input, the rpm went crazy and blew the brushes away.

Why do you think that is?

What happens when 2 coils of opposite orientation occupy the same space?
They should cancel, but is that what really happens?
Just thinking artv

It depends upon the conditions. In a generator or transformer, it is the stronger field that wins and flux goes with the stronger field until the core is saturated and then flux leaks out and efficiency drops in my opinion.