My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[HuntingRoss]

My thoughts on Motors and Testing

The purpose of an electric motor is to convert electrical energy into mechanical energy as efficiently as possible. The measure of that output is torque.

As a novice builder some months ago, I was under the impression that revs equals torque. However. High revs does not necessarily equate to high torque.

There is a belief that calculating RPM/W is a good guide to the motors performance against a benchmark, usually the unmodified OEM baseline.

Over the past few days I have been Prony testing all the motors on my kitchen table. A few are presented here using my theory on percentage comparison :

No load figures for Watts and RPM on a 10v PSU (using ~ as a separator) -
OEM ~ 3.29W ~ 1492rpm
SC7 ~ 5.35W ~ 2823rpm
SC10 ~ 4.84W ~ 3160rpm

Taking the OEM as 100% -
OEM ~ 100% ~ 100%
SC7 ~ 163% ~ 189%
SC10 ~ 147% ~ 212%

%RPM/%W (result should be 1 'one' or higher to out perform the OEM) -
OEM ~ 1
SC7 ~ 1.16
SC10 ~ 1.44

Both motors out perform the OEM on the assumption that 'no load' RPM/W is a comparison.

Prony results - Torque output and Watts input -
OEM ~ 25.2Ncm ~ 40.26W
SC6 ~ 31.5Ncm ~ 102.52W
SC7 ~ 23.9Ncm ~ 69.84W
SC10 ~ 27.6Ncm ~ 84.2W

Taking the OEM as 100% -
OEM ~ 100% ~ 100%
SC6 ~ 125% ~ 255%
SC7 ~ 95% ~ 174%
SC10 ~ 110% ~ 209%

%Torque/%W (again, result should be 1 'one' or higher to out perform the OEM) -
OEM ~ 1
SC6 ~ 0.49
SC7 ~ 0.55
SC10 ~ 0.53

Two of the motors produce higher torque but all at the expense of higher watts. Accordingly, none of the motors have a high Torque/W ratio.

It's my assertion that the best method of comparison is Torque/Watt ratio. Not RPM/Watt ratio which can mislead.

Happy Hunting

mark

[HuntingRoss]

Mark,

The 21 Amps means 'Max Current Limit Settings' which is set up at PSU, which means they were regulating Voltage while Amps was fixed to Max Output.

It could be done the other way around, which is the proper way I think, meaning to set Amps Output 'Floating' (not fixed) so, depending on Voltage increase the PSU will do 'the math' automatically according to amps demand from machine.

It seems too many amps applied for such low voltage at start up, eg:1.9V X 20A...but Machine does take it well...

The advantage of an Asymmetric Machine is that since they are Open Circuits, closing up only for nano seconds when each coil is fired, there is NO time enough for Amps to fully develop within energized circuit, since Amps in order to 'populate' in an ascending and steady curve require a full time closed circuit. Actually the proper reading needs to be done with a DC Pulsed Amp Meter, (have no idea if that kind of tool has been designed yet...) that would calculate 'an average' operating amps per fraction of time.


Cheers


Ufopolitics

1.9volts @ 21amps... 40 watts starts RPMs. Start of vid
20Volts @ 21apms... 420 watts vid's peak RPMs at the end(did you hear those RPMs increasing to 20 volts)

Thanks UFO.

That confirms my assumption based on the low starting volts, and it has been confirmed now that the power consumption at 20v is 420W.

This seems very high to me for a 'no load' test. Perhaps I'm just used to smaller motors.

Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

The purpose of an electric motor is to convert electrical energy into mechanical energy as efficiently as possible. The measure of that output is torque.

As a novice builder some months ago, I was under the impression that revs equals torque. However. High revs does not necessarily equate to high torque.

There is a belief that calculating RPM/W is a good guide to the motors performance against a benchmark, usually the unmodified OEM baseline.

Over the past few days I have been Prony testing all the motors on my kitchen table. A few are presented here using my theory on percentage comparison :

No load figures for Watts and RPM on a 10v PSU (using ~ as a separator) -
OEM ~ 3.29W ~ 1492rpm
SC7 ~ 5.35W ~ 2823rpm
SC10 ~ 4.84W ~ 3160rpm

Taking the OEM as 100% -
OEM ~ 100% ~ 100%
SC7 ~ 163% ~ 189%
SC10 ~ 147% ~ 212%

%RPM/%W (result should be 1 'one' or higher to out perform the OEM) -
OEM ~ 1
SC7 ~ 1.16
SC10 ~ 1.44

Both motors out perform the OEM on the assumption that 'no load' RPM/W is a comparison.

Prony results - Torque output and Watts input -
OEM ~ 25.2Ncm ~ 40.26W
SC6 ~ 31.5Ncm ~ 102.52W
SC7 ~ 23.9Ncm ~ 69.84W
SC10 ~ 27.6Ncm ~ 84.2W

Taking the OEM as 100% -
OEM ~ 100% ~ 100%
SC6 ~ 125% ~ 255%
SC7 ~ 95% ~ 174%
SC10 ~ 110% ~ 209%

%Torque/%W (again, result should be 1 'one' or higher to out perform the OEM) -
OEM ~ 1
SC6 ~ 0.49
SC7 ~ 0.55
SC10 ~ 0.53

Two of the motors produce higher torque but all at the expense of higher watts. Accordingly, none of the motors have a high Torque/W ratio.

It's my assertion that the best method of comparison is Torque/Watt ratio. Not RPM/Watt ratio which can mislead.

Happy Hunting

mark

Mark,

Are all your Asymmetric Motors done right now?... for the Tests shown above?

Meaning, you are still having ON the leaving/disconnecting coil, while it was passing the South Stator Bisector?

According to your latest post discussion with me...the geometry of your motor would not allow to switch OFF the leaving coil while it was passing South Stator Bisector.

That is a Killer for Performance...and if you still have all those wrong time settings, all those tests are not valid.


Keep Hunting...


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Once Upon a Time...

Hello to All,


I have repeated this here to exhaustion...but, I will do it again.

In a Symmetric Motor "World", a closed looped motor, having High RPM's does NOT means -AT ALL- motor have also a Higher Torque, BUT the opposite 'applies' in this old technology.

In Symmetry RPM's and TORQUE are completely "INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL"...which means you can ONLY have either one Parameter 'seating' at High levels, while 'sacrificing the second.

Asymmetry wipes out this VERY OLD Concept in Motors, demonstrating Both Parameters can be completely and DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL.

Which means that a Higher RPM Motor DOES MEAN it has a Higher Torque included in the package.

Therefore, We can NOT MIX old concepts and apply them to Asymmetry Machines testing results.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[HuntingRoss]

Mark,

Are all your Asymmetric Motors done right now?... for the Tests shown above?

Meaning, you are still having ON the leaving/disconnecting coil, while it was passing the South Stator Bisector?

According to your latest post discussion with me...the geometry of your motor would not allow to switch OFF the leaving coil while it was passing South Stator Bisector.

That is a Killer for Performance...and if you still have all those wrong time settings, all those tests are not valid.


Keep Hunting...


Ufopolitics

Hi UFO

None of the above motors suffer from the uncorrectable faults of the schematic that a 'certain member' of the forum chose to cause mischief with.

All of the above motors have excellent timing setups within the parameters we debated recently.

Happy Hunting

mark

[bistander]

I have a question

We have the RPMs and weight of the rotor increasing the torque.


Should we even care about Horsepower anymore?!

Do you care if your motorcycle can go 5km/h, or 10km/h, or 20? Then you need to care about power output. And what does the weight of the rotor have to do with torque? You need to measure torque against current otherwise you're just guessing without a clue.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO

None of the above motors suffer from the uncorrectable faults of the schematic that a 'certain member' of the forum chose to cause mischief with.

All of the above motors have excellent timing setups within the parameters we debated recently.

Happy Hunting

mark

Well Mark,

Then there is absolutely something Else Wrong with them all...

None of the Asymmetric, not even the 5 pole Radio-Shack North South old type versus its OEM version would EVER be lower in Torque.

They could draw more Amps, which We have debated before...but NEVER related to be low in Torque nor RPM's...both in ONE SHOT..

So far in this entire Thread -which is, by the way pretty large, as everyone knows- no one had those results before.

So, it is simple math...


Ufopolitics

[GChilders]

Timing positions on The Battle of The Windings

Garry,

My Friend, according to my experience with Asymmetric Machines, basically in the R/S Motor... I believe I am 'qualified' to say You have done an Excellent Job...when looking at the Old R/S Five Poles North-South Wind, and being able to get those 0.5~0.6 amp draw readings!!

I know that is no 'piece of cake' to achieve!...got to be done with LOTS of patience ...

It is "self explanatory", plus you have high lighted the sweetest spots in green line readings...

So, yes, all this results were expected...at least by me, is what I'm saying...

The AN1 and AN2 Amp draw is impressively low!!

Resuming for what I can see the sweetest spots are found in T#1 and T#2, meaning in Attract Mode, right?...(And I am referring basically to AN1 & AN2, since I am not even looking at N/S nor AN3)


Thanks, excellent job Garry!!


Regards


Ufopolitics

@ufo
T1 is the setting that goldmine has selected for the goldmine motor. Unfortunate design in the brush holders makes it very difficult to calculate their starting angle for the brushes because the brushes come together at a different angle when the rotor is removed. So all of the other timing positions are relative to that position. You are correct in that T2 and also T3 favor the attraction mode of the motor winding. T2 is approximately 5 to 7 degrees rotation towards the south stator this definitely favors the attraction mode. T3 is approximately 10 to 14 degrees rotation towards the south stator.
T3 and T4 are the exact opposite in relation to T1. They both favor the repulsion mode. Midaz can't seem to grasp this simple fact that the ideal position for AN2 is the T1 timing position. One final note on this. These are very crude timing positions. I have not had enough time to try to dial these in. In the automobile industry a 5 to 7 degree jump would be unheard of. Here 1 degree could make a huge difference in performance. Taking the AN2 for example this rotor could find better performance by going in the center of position 1 or 2 and testing it and then trying the center of the position 2 or 3. Time constraints will only let me go so far with these tests. I think the point has been made though. Finding the sweet spot through testing can yield significant improvement in the motor's efficiency.

I have a number of tests that are scheduled this week that will begin to exploit the asymmetrical side of our motors. This is going to get very interesting indeed.

Cheers

Garry

[GChilders]

The Contest has only begun

@Sampojo
I think that both the AN1 and AN2 are hugely successful and it is a little early in the contest to declare one a winner. What I think is developing is unique characteristics in each winding that we may be able to exploit for different purposes. I am still mulling over the results in absolute amazement that the timing could make such a radical difference in power consumption. I expected better results but not such huge differences as I have seen. Many tests remain to be conducted and are scheduled this week as time permits. Having finally gotten to the point of knowing how to document this process efficiently they should go much smoother and easier.

Cheers

Garry

[dyetalon]

Don't forget, there was a strand of 18awg wedged between the rotor and magnets during the check. Plus the bearing is rubbing heavily on the front end plate. The wire was the ping and I stopped the testing. I'm just happy it ran like a normal motor on DC power supply. That was my focus.

At 48v, this unbalanced motor is well over 7000rpms with the vibrations to match! The frame is built for 3000rpms with no vibrations.

Yes, I realize your motor was compromised during testing, one more reason to be impressed.

Once you get your machine repaired, you can get a rough estimate of available horsepower and efficiency without using a dyno:

1. Measure the weight of your rotor and shaft assembly
2. Put your current clamp around the battery lead
3. Set your tachometer up to read rpm
4. Fire that baby up
5. When the motor reaches operating speed, save the current clamp reading and the tach speed simultaneously (its hard to do).

Calculate the input: Supply (Volts) X Current (Amps) = Input Watts

Now you can use the same formula we discussed earlier.

Weight (LBS) x RPM/5252 = Horsepower X .756 = Output Watts

Divide output Watts by input Watts, move the decimal point to the right two places and you get the motors efficiency (approximately).

This may seem like a lot of trouble to go thru, but you will never know if this motor design is worse-good-better or best when compared to other designs.

Horsepower and efficiency are the only factors to consider when comparing motors. Anything can spin around, but motors are for doing work- which translates into horsepower.

You should be very happy with the machine you built. It's solid and quite a runner. Balancing is a time consuming practice and requires special equipment. You may find a local motor rewind shop or motorcycle shop that can do it for you. It's worth the effort (higher rpm and much safer).

[HuntingRoss]

Well Mark,

Then there is absolutely something Else Wrong with them all...

None of the Asymmetric, not even the 5 pole Radio-Shack North South old type versus its OEM version would EVER be lower in Torque.

They could draw more Amps, which We have debated before...but NEVER related to be low in Torque nor RPM's...both in ONE SHOT..

So far in this entire Thread -which is, by the way pretty large, as everyone knows- no one had those results before.

So, it is simple math...


Ufopolitics

Hi UFO

I seem to remember you saying many moons ago, that winding these motors is simple 'that even your grand daughter can do it'...or words to that effect.

And I have to say I agree. Following a schematic is not difficult. Selecting the correct gauge of wire is not catastrophic. Filling the slots is not difficult to comprehend. Even for a complete novice as I was when I joined the forum.

I have built A LOT of double and single comm versions now and my build quality is noticeably better than my first efforts. So I would guess the problem is unlikely to be the build quality.

On the Prony tests the motors were between 14 and 19% behind the OEM quoted efficiency of >70%. Which for hand built, I'm guessing, is to be expected. Either way the efficiencies don't seem bad enough to negate any gain the asymm design should deliver.

They could draw more Amps, which We have debated before...but NEVER related to be low in Torque nor RPM's...both in ONE SHOT..

To date, every motor I have built has exceeded the OEM RPM...most of them quite dramatically. Only two of them have exceeded the torque, and I can't explain how one doesn't come with the other for all the motors.

I remain undefeated. My latest SC10 gave an increase in RPM and reduction in Watts compared to the SC7 which is all good. The torque exceeds the OEM...BUT...the watts are still too high. If I plug this motor into the scooter it will run the batteries down too fast. And there is not sufficient torque to throttle back and use less Watts.

I feel the answer is close, but it just evades me.

Carry on Hunting

mark

[Midaztouch]

Should we even care about Horsepower anymore?!

Do you care if your motorcycle can go 5km/h, or 10km/h, or 20? Then you need to care about power output. And what does the weight of the rotor have to do with torque? You need to measure torque against current otherwise you're just guessing without a clue.

Below is a graft of a motor. A motor that is in our "Class". Our homemade motor can match the torque... BUT We have double the RPMs @ 48v! GEARING



Graft of a Lynch electric motor 48v = 3000 rpm's = 67rpms per volt... A1MoGen 48v = 7000 rpm's = 146 rpm's per volt
http://lynchmotors.co.uk/pdfs/lmc-lem-200.pdf = $1,800 motor vs A1MoGen $500

[HuntingRoss]

Question on Diodes

@ All

I have seen it written on this thread that capacitors can be used on the coils...so I'm wondering if diodes can be used to solve one of the key differences between the single comm hybrid that I am currently pursuing and the double comm standard.

The main (and significant) difference between the two builds is the SC motors have to energise the coils north and south which reportedly gives a higher amp draw and also causes the coils to flik-flak as they roll past the brushes every 180°.

If it is possible to incorporate diodes into the hostile environment of a fast spinning motor with fluctuating heat gains then I could isolate the southern path which would then energise 'north' 180° later...no flik-flak and hopefully less amps.

Happy Hunting

mark

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO

I seem to remember you saying many moons ago, that winding these motors is simple 'that even your grand daughter can do it'...or words to that effect.

And I have to say I agree. Following a schematic is not difficult. Selecting the correct gauge of wire is not catastrophic. Filling the slots is not difficult to comprehend. Even for a complete novice as I was when I joined the forum.

I have built A LOT of double and single comm versions now and my build quality is noticeably better than my first efforts. So I would guess the problem is unlikely to be the build quality.

Mark,

On your first Motor built, you were having issues on pulling one of the commutators...so you 'decided' to build Two Stators and Two sets of Magnets and join two embodiments...Now, that, for whatever reason is not an exact Replication of the Asymmetric Motor.

I have NEVER joint Two Rotors, nor Two sets of Magnets in my whole 'history' here at Energetic Forum...but you did.

Then you tried all kind of different approaches in the windings which diverge completely from what I have been showing here...First, because like I said before...I have never done that kind of "fusion".

Here, that I know off, maybe one or two experienced Members have done it...and I know Dana (Prochiro) has done it in a smaller version...as I believe Sam (Sampojo) as well...and both replications were successful.

On the Prony tests the motors were between 14 and 19% behind the OEM quoted efficiency of >70%. Which for hand built, I'm guessing, is to be expected. Either way the efficiencies don't seem bad enough to negate any gain the asymm design should deliver.

To date, every motor I have built has exceeded the OEM RPM...most of them quite dramatically. Only two of them have exceeded the torque, and I can't explain how one doesn't come with the other for all the motors.

I remain undefeated. My latest SC10 gave an increase in RPM and reduction in Watts compared to the SC7 which is all good. The torque exceeds the OEM...BUT...the watts are still too high. If I plug this motor into the scooter it will run the batteries down too fast. And there is not sufficient torque to throttle back and use less Watts.

I feel the answer is close, but it just evades me.

Carry on Hunting

mark

Is your new SC7 a Two Rotor and Two Stator Assembly still?

But the bottom line here is that recently you have shown a Motor Diagram I said it will have issues with the Timing...and You accepted it was the 'Geometry' not allowing it...

And now you are saying they are all fine tuned all the sudden?

What did you do now?...did you overlapped coils?...did you set smaller commutators?

But keep 'hunting' you may find where the error is somehow...you are a smart guy...so go for it!


On my end, I have spent too much time here lately while piles of work awaits...so I will see you after I catch up.


Keep going!


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

@ All

I have seen it written on this thread that capacitors can be used on the coils...so I'm wondering if diodes can be used to solve one of the key differences between the single comm hybrid that I am currently pursuing and the double comm standard.

The main (and significant) difference between the two builds is the SC motors have to energise the coils north and south which reportedly gives a higher amp draw and also causes the coils to flik-flak as they roll past the brushes every 180°.

If it is possible to incorporate diodes into the hostile environment of a fast spinning motor with fluctuating heat gains then I could isolate the southern path which would then energise 'north' 180° later...no flik-flak and hopefully less amps.

Happy Hunting

mark

Mark,

I already tried that 'option' with Diodes once...and it happens on a motor exactly as yours...a 12 pole:

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

It may look very nice, and yes, a LOT of WORK...BUT IT DON'T WORK!

Sorry!


Keep Hunting!...


Ufopolitics