My Motors got me to Tap into Radiant Energy

[Ufopolitics]

Hello Qvision,

Hi all

Hello Qvision,

i've decided to try with a 3-pole motor due to it's simplicity and just to observe the difference in behaviour between that and a standard motor :

That is a good Choice, simpler Machine, yet, very powerful...

One thing is confusing me and i would like to clear it up before i start work on this.

In the description above it says the advantage of this winding is that there are two coils outputting and only one coil inputing.

I've analysed the firing sequence of the coils and this seems to be wrong.

In My Opinion (IMO):

IF, Before you even start taking apart your original motor...you start "assuming/theorizing/believing" that a Motor that I have displayed here a while back, that I have displayed so many angle interactions and explanations... and that has been replicated by so many people here...AND that BEFORE THAT...I have wounded hundreds of this Motors, in all sizes and "colors"...thinking something is wrong with it?...To me that is a "daring attitude" without the right knowledge...but to You... it would be an obstacle to "see" your Future Asymmetric Motor running properly...other words, and also simpler..."You will be programming yourself for failure..."...Ok?

Using the coil colours in the diagram (Gree, Blue and Turqoise) the input firing sequence is :

Green.
Green and Turq.
Turq.
Blue and Turq.
Blue.
Green and blue.

In the list of input charges above, the coils not on each line are obviously outputting.

When you analyse the sequence you can see that the input and output charges balance out, they sum to zero.

WRONG ASSUMPTION WITHOUT EVEN A REAL TEST.


It is very obvious You HAVE NOT Analyzed this Design Model properly...

Take a look at the size of Brushes, their WIDTH, compared to the size of Commutator Elements ANGLES of INTERACTION (And I have displayed "pretty big sized" brushes here)

THEN, You will notice, the brush size is "Approximate" One Third here...of the whole comm element...

Now go back to your "Assumption" and ALL those "Common Time Sweep" for Two simultaneous Coils or Transition Time...and calculate Interaction Time...based on say...3600 RPM's (taking it "easy"...knowing this Motors go higher than that)...

If We have Three divided by 360º...every element is "Approximate" @ 120º (knowing we have a gap in between, disregarding it here for being too small)...right?...OK, So...One Third of 120º is 40 degrees right?...So, divide that by two Commutator Elements on each side between center of brush...what we got then?...20º to turn off one coil and go full on second one...

Calculate "Transition Time" here...at 3600 RPM's...then DO IT for 20,000 RPM's...

You will see what I have written many , many times BACK...It is completely worthless to consider such "Action"...MUCH LESS...To assume they are "so equal" they will ALL cancel to ZERO.

What are people's thoughts on this ?


Thank you,

QV.

IMO?...What Do I think of this?

I will tell you...

Ignorance is DARING...

An old phrase that I love...AND VERY TRUE


Regards


Ufopolitics

PD: And Please, a Message to All:

ALL Motors and Interaction Related Posts, let's keep them together in the other Asymmetric Machines Thread.

It will be of much more easier access for new coming members or anyone to have all related Material in just one Thread...and not be scattered all over...

[JohnStone]

Hi Ufo,
I understand your demands and we will devide them in basic functions and control functions in order to rule them. Divide and impera! (Divide and rule!) That's still true!

0. Sub basic layer building Arduino pulser and Monster driver. Some means for switching between drive and gen required as well. (Here we struggle just now)

1. We will decide on what power modes we want to have and what regenerating modes we will have. Those modes can be tested separately.

2. We will decide on external actions, controls and measurements like thorttle, speed, emergency control or simple mains voltage at output .....

3.On top of those basic and dumb functions we set a control layer. This layer is the "intelligence" we need to ponder on, program it and test it. Fortunately this layer can be tested thoroughly without any external reality - thus no accidents.

4. On top of those 3 layers we get a layer for monitoring and surveillance. Independently of layers above it makes use of same input and output signals but checks plausibility. Any abnormal condition (like too much rpm) will shut down the system in smart and safe way. Thus program errors can be dealt with in a safe way.

Those layers do not need to be performed by a single micro only - too dangerous and too difficult to debug.
----------------------------

Regarding the first two layers:
What controls the speed of the motor? You mentioned to control them by pulse speed similar to a stepper motor. Is that for low rpm only or will it contuinue at higher rpm? Do we drive it in a kind of synchronous mode?
Sorry for this question - I did not get it in my mind yet.

rgds
JohnS

[Cornboy 555]

What a Community spirit!

Thanks, for everyones input on this control system, i totally agree that the system we use should be as universal to all members as possible, and the ability to exchange codes etc would be of real importance for someone like myself.

When it came to programing or troubleshooting i would be in the dark till i learn this tech.

I am completly in your hands Guy's, i will use what ever you recomend.

Thanks once again everyone,

Regards Cornboy.

[qvision]

OK thank you.

Hello Qvision,



That is a good Choice, simpler Machine, yet, very powerful...



In My Opinion (IMO):

IF, Before you even start taking apart your original motor...you start "assuming/theorizing/believing" that a Motor that I have displayed here a while back, that I have displayed so many angle interactions and explanations... and that has been replicated by so many people here...AND that BEFORE THAT...I have wounded hundreds of this Motors, in all sizes and "colors"...thinking something is wrong with it?...To me that is a "daring attitude" without the right knowledge...but to You... it would be an obstacle to "see" your Future Asymmetric Motor running properly...other words, and also simpler..."You will be programming yourself for failure..."...Ok?




WRONG ASSUMPTION WITHOUT EVEN A REAL TEST.


It is very obvious You HAVE NOT Analyzed this Design Model properly...

Take a look at the size of Brushes, their WIDTH, compared to the size of Commutator Elements ANGLES of INTERACTION (And I have displayed "pretty big sized" brushes here)

THEN, You will notice, the brush size is "Approximate" One Third here...of the whole comm element...

Now go back to your "Assumption" and ALL those "Common Time Sweep" for Two simultaneous Coils or Transition Time...and calculate Interaction Time...based on say...3600 RPM's (taking it "easy"...knowing this Motors go higher than that)...

If We have Three divided by 360º...every element is "Approximate" @ 120º (knowing we have a gap in between, disregarding it here for being too small)...right?...OK, So...One Third of 120º is 40 degrees right?...So, divide that by two Commutator Elements on each side between center of brush...what we got then?...20º to turn off one coil and go full on second one...

Calculate "Transition Time" here...at 3600 RPM's...then DO IT for 20,000 RPM's...

You will see what I have written many , many times BACK...It is completely worthless to consider such "Action"...MUCH LESS...To assume they are "so equal" they will ALL cancel to ZERO.




IMO?...What Do I think of this?

I will tell you...

Ignorance is DARING...

An old phrase that I love...AND VERY TRUE


Regards


Ufopolitics

PD: And Please, a Message to All:

ALL Motors and Interaction Related Posts, let's keep them together in the other Asymmetric Machines Thread.

It will be of much more easier access for new coming members or anyone to have all related Material in just one Thread...and not be scattered all over...

Thanks for taking the time to explain.

I will shut up and build it ;+}


All the best,

[JohnStone]

Thanks for taking the time to explain.

I will shut up and build it ;+}

All the best,

Hi qvision,
sorry for chiming in in your discussion with UFO!
I want to say: you showed up big grandeur. Few react in this way. You will not regeret your step!
JohnS

[nico8k]

Hello Ufo, John, Cornboy and All

I am totally agree on using same platform, it is easier for testing and debugging if we all walk in the same path.
I've recommended to Cornboy the Arduino Mega assuming the idea on using only one arduino, but as John said... it is better to use another Arduinos for different tasks... "think in modules" you are right John!

In learning programming you always start with the great "Hello World" so lets start with a simple project and see how it goes...
In case you have not seen my post sharing my PWM project:

Dropbox PWM Project

NicoPWMSwitch Board.jpg

Anyone who has an Arduino please download the files and make some test.
When we ALL have this simple PWM project running we can start to upgrade it or even make new ones on request.

@John this project is just a simple PWM to feed your FET driver, please check what needs to connect to your driver. Thanks.

Regards

Nico

[Ufopolitics]

Thanks to You QV

Thanks for taking the time to explain.

I will shut up and build it ;+}


All the best,

Hello Qvision,

Thanks for that answer, like John Stone wrote...not many people will take it/react like You did.
This answer makes you very big and very smart to me, and I will help you as much as I could, so you make a HECK of a BUILD!!

The Three Pole will teach you many other interesting things...

Warm regards, and my apologies if i was a bit too rough/tough on you...however, my intentions worked out...I wanted you to focus more on build than tinkering...and your electronics skills are great...so you will become a great builder of this Machines and their controls.

Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Great Nico!

Hello Ufo, John, Cornboy and All

I am totally agree on using same platform, it is easier for testing and debugging if we all walk in the same path.
I've recommended to Cornboy the Arduino Mega assuming the idea on using only one arduino, but as John said... it is better to use another Arduinos for different tasks... "think in modules" you are right John!

In learning programming you always start with the great "Hello World" so lets start with a simple project and see how it goes...
In case you have not seen my post sharing my PWM project:

Dropbox PWM Project

[ATTACH]12939[/ATTACH]

Anyone who has an Arduino please download the files and make some test.
When we ALL have this simple PWM project running we can start to upgrade it or even make new ones on request.

@John this project is just a simple PWM to feed your FET driver, please check what needs to connect to your driver. Thanks.

Regards

Nico

Hello my friend!

Wow!, impressive!, that is great and looking beautiful!!

We are gonna be "Rock and Rolling" very soon!!

Un Abrazo Hermano!


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Great John!

Hi Ufo,
I understand your demands and we will devide them in basic functions and control functions in order to rule them. Divide and impera! (Divide and rule!) That's still true!

0. Sub basic layer building Arduino pulser and Monster driver. Some means for switching between drive and gen required as well. (Here we struggle just now)

1. We will decide on what power modes we want to have and what regenerating modes we will have. Those modes can be tested separately.

2. We will decide on external actions, controls and measurements like thorttle, speed, emergency control or simple mains voltage at output .....

3.On top of those basic and dumb functions we set a control layer. This layer is the "intelligence" we need to ponder on, program it and test it. Fortunately this layer can be tested thoroughly without any external reality - thus no accidents.

4. On top of those 3 layers we get a layer for monitoring and surveillance. Independently of layers above it makes use of same input and output signals but checks plausibility. Any abnormal condition (like too much rpm) will shut down the system in smart and safe way. Thus program errors can be dealt with in a safe way.

Those layers do not need to be performed by a single micro only - too dangerous and too difficult to debug.
----------------------------

Regarding the first two layers:
What controls the speed of the motor? You mentioned to control them by pulse speed similar to a stepper motor. Is that for low rpm only or will it contuinue at higher rpm? Do we drive it in a kind of synchronous mode?
Sorry for this question - I did not get it in my mind yet.

rgds
JohnS

Hello John,

That's great! I am glad you've got the path...and understanding.

Now, I do not want you to get confused with stepper motors and our Asymmetric In/Out Coils...they are different.

Stepper Motors like the name spells are based on "Step Coils", coils ahead of others, wrapped around a steel frame lamination or a permanent magnet "special layered" core... we could easily roll them over a linear pattern...and will become a "linear stepper motor"...

Our Asymmetric Coils are different...they develop a much more Dynamic Pattern...a Spiral...and that can not be rolled over and become linear...just because its Asymmetrical Shape and Magnetic Patterns.

If once I spoke about steppers was just to bring in the way they get their pulses in different Phases...however, that also happens (as I have also mentioned) in Brush-Less Designs.


Hope You understood my explanation...


Kind Regards


Ufopolitics

[prochiro]

Hello Nico8K
Thank you for the diagram and code. I thought you may like to see what it looks like on a Leonardo and proto board.

It works so well and is vary accurate as you said. I even stuck the opto on there for fun. Thanks for the help.
Dana

[IndianaBoys]

Ufopolitics,

I know you like various information related to Asymmetrical:

Spinning Disk Trick Solution
Spinning Disk Trick Solution - YouTube

IndianaBoys

[prochiro]

G-Code

Hi All & JohnStone
Does anyone have the milling G-Code for JohnStones Monster V5.1. I use Mach3 program.

@ JohnStone
Does your program produce G-Code output for milling? If not could you send me what is does output and I will try to convert it.
Dana

[JohnStone]

@ JohnStone
Does your program produce G-Code output for milling? If not could you send me what is does output and I will try to convert it.
Dana

Hi Dana,
Here you are! Production files!
No idea what it is exactly but I was told there are XGerber and Exellon files herein.
I was told that this converter can convert those files in G-Code
Gerber viewer online.

I hope you can make use of those files.
JohnS

[prochiro]

@ JohnStone
Thanks JS, I know what to do with them.
Now on the circuit, I have breadboarded thru the 74hc132n and getting a 4.64 volt square signal. One interesting thing is that there are micro wiggles on both the top and bottom as well as the leading edge of on signal. I noted that when I took out the 1uF cap, the signal was perfect with hard corners. I know you must have another reason for the cap being there and can tolerate the wiggles. Moving on to the MIC4452YN unless I here from you. Thanks
Dana

[JohnStone]

Answer to Machine:

...
@ johnstone, The arduino only outputs 5v, and the FOD3180 needs 10v, what is the easiest way to get arduino up to 12v, have it switch a fet or a 555 which switches the fod3180 at 12v. I got the fod3180 output down to 5v, but I am not sure what I should and should not due, I don't want to hurt poor old leonardo
I may just skip the opto and switch nand gate directly, I don't know. I will have this driver finished tonight or tomorrow, and will probably just use the same oscillator that I used previously. Until I figure out what to due....

Hi Machine!
Welcome back in workshop!
My driver is a well tuned entity and shall not modified and mised deliberately. But do not worry I support you . I do not know what your goal is:
A. Original Monster driver but replace SFH617 with FOD3180. This does not really make sense! But can be done - on request!

B. Enhancement of your current setup. I tinkerd for modifying the original monster dirver V5.1.
WARNING:
This version of driver does not have those superiour properties of the original circuit. It shall be used along FETs with gate capacity lower than 1.5nF. Else check frequently for heat.
For moderate use with smaller motors this circuit might be used. There is no power on delay and signals are not restored.

FOD3180 is FET driver with opto input - isolated! You are not suggested to feed the power from Arduino board as you want to have galvanic separation. But first facts first!

1. Your Arduino can source and sink those 10 mA you need to input. As the input LED at opto eats up 1.5V you consider 3.5V / 10mA and compute 350Ohm - take 330Ohm an it will be OK. Else use 1K for 12V generator.

2. Your Arduino sources very clear signals thus you do not need any conditioning. Please use two twisted wires from Arduino to FOD3180 (port / GND) in order to prevent interference from your Setup.

3. Do not make any other connection from your Arduino!

4. Provide a separated PSU for FOD3180. I suggest you look in your scrap box in order to extract an old socket charger delivering a voltage between 15... 18V - open output! It will need to supply some mA only - 100mA will be great.

5. Connect a 100µF and 100nF in parallel directly where you solder the leads of charger - for blocking any interference.

6. The output section of FOD3180 is very same like that micrel driver on my board (but 2A output instead 12A). You may continue like my PCB suggests.

7. If the descripion above is your desire: see your personal version


circuit
assembly
wiring bottom



EDIT: This circuit is NO revision of V51.1 posted before. It is a study of possible shortcut for lower power switch.

~o0o~

Regarding avalanche: It can be used safely if we add overcurrent protection. I did not touch this item up to now in order to not deviate.

~o0o~

JohnS