Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[citfta]

Hello Bi and Ufo,

Yes Bi, as Ufo has posted that is the correct way I have modified the motor. That was only an idea to test to see if I thought it might work in place of building a part G from scratch. I think it would probably be improved by rewinding the armature to more conform to the original configuration Figuera used. But even if you rewound the armature that would still be much easier than starting from scratch I think.

I am curious as to what you might think could be an issue with this. My testing so far has shown that it does in fact produce an alternating rough sine wave with 180 degree phase difference. There probably needs to be another inductor in series with the input power lead in order to reduce some of the spiking seen in my scope shots. The idea Ufo suggested of using the existing field windings as individual inductors for each primary coil may be the solution for the spiky signal. Although I am not so sure the spikes are even a problem because when I load down the secondary the secondary signal shows no spikes.

I like my modified motor because it lends itself so well to a lot of different experimental ideas. One idea I tried yesterday was to short out each of the field coils by just connecting the leads together. What really surprised me was that when both field coils were shorted the output went up slightly more than double what it was when the coils were just idly sitting there. And as far as I could tell without connecting some good meters the input power to the slip ring did not go up at all. And the input power to my driving motor did not go up either. Unfortunately before I could continue working and studying on this result I had to stop and go help my son on some projects.

Later,
Carroll

[Ufopolitics]

A Quick drawing about Citfta's Part G

Hello to All,

Guess you all would be lost without my graphics...

Here is a quick drawing of Citfta's Part G:



OK, now you guys must realize that all coils in the armature of a Universal Motor (like in any other brushed motor) are "typically" OVERLAPPED, and not like represented on diagram above, I did it like that for purposes of clarity in the whole graphic.

Whole Armature is contained within the black circle.

On the center the gold smaller ring is the CONTINUOUS SLIP RING, where the Small Positive Brush is connected to Source Positive.

We could see a gold wire running from Slip Ring to just ONE ELEMENT of the Commutator, that I painted RED with a + sign within.

Commutator is based on a 16 elements as in Figuera's Patent from 1908, brushes are contacting Two Elements as also directed by Figuera, not allowing Field to Collapse.

Say we are rotating whole armature in a CW direction or as represented by "R"...Then, Primary 1 would start the short period of MAX ENERGIZING, while Primary 2 would be at it LOWEST ENERGIZING...

Advancing rotation 180º then the opposite will take effect, like seen below:



Hope is clearer now.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hi citfta,

Still thinking about your armature partG idea. I found a diagram of a 2-pole armature which can help visualize the operation and modification.


From: https://www.nidec.com/en-EU/technolo...r/basic/00014/

Diagram (b) is best help. It is depicted as a motor armature with brushes connected to a battery. For use as partG, replace the battery with the 2 primary coils in series, with the power source connected to the junction of the 2 primary coils. Now the other power source lead connects to commutator bar where armature coils a & b are connected. Right?

I think I see an issue but would like to get your agreement with the above before diving into it. I wish I had computer graphics software and skills, but I think the diagram above will suffice for now. I think most of these cheap universal motor armatures will have more comm bars and probably even counts. That really doesn't matter, the diagram can still apply.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

I think you've got it right...

Citfta sends the source positive through a wire from slip ring to just one element of commutator...which travels through armature via one wire.

I honestly do not see any issues with this design, exactly SAME thing as rotating one positive brush through a fixed commutator.

On previous part G there was an issue with Inductance balancing and I believe on this design could be erradicated if we use one side stator coil en series with one brush as so the other brush in series with opposite stator coil...this way magnetic flux will be forced to stay at the active side only (high).

Just my 2 pennies...


Regards



Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Diagram

Hi Dwane,

I am not sure what you mean. The picture of my modified motor connected to the MY scooter motor is still there in post number 2781 of this thread.

Carroll

Hi citfta,

Still thinking about your armature partG idea. I found a diagram of a 2-pole armature which can help visualize the operation and modification.


From: https://www.nidec.com/en-EU/technolo...r/basic/00014/

Diagram (b) is best help. It is depicted as a motor armature with brushes connected to a battery. For use as partG, replace the battery with the 2 primary coils in series, with the power source connected to the junction of the 2 primary coils. Now the other power source lead connects to commutator bar where armature coils a & b are connected. Right?

I think I see an issue but would like to get your agreement with the above before diving into it. I wish I had computer graphics software and skills, but I think the diagram above will suffice for now. I think most of these cheap universal motor armatures will have more comm bars and probably even counts. That really doesn't matter, the diagram can still apply.

Regards,

bi

[citfta]

Hi Dwane,

I am not sure what you mean. The picture of my modified motor connected to the MY scooter motor is still there in post number 2781 of this thread.

Carroll

[Dwane]

Missing photo

Hi guys,
I come back in to look at the layout using the MY motor and this has disappeared.

So what is serious here?

Dwane

[Dwane]

Hi citfta,
I spend today looking at the patent and my design options. It has occurred to me that you have actually deciphered Clemente's design! With the exception of the dual pole rotor on the "G". What the original patent shows is a switch and coils, literally a commutator and armature coils from a series wound motor!
F...ing brilliant! No wonder he stated that he used parts lying around.

What he has done by removing his field coils and using the armature is to remove the Lenz impediment.

You are a very clever person!!

Regards

Dwane

Dwane

[Dwane]

Yes, that is the kind of motor you want. You will of course need to go back and read my post on how to modify it to work as a part G. The field coils are not used.

Carroll

Hi citfta,
Thanks for the heads up. I can organise one of these motors and follow your instructions. Might take a few days getting one delivered.

Just out of interest, we are not looking for any radiant spikes are we? Just smooth sailing: the ambience being sucked into the secondary coil by the load?

Regards

Dwane

[citfta]

Hi Ufo,

Those are all things it would be interesting to try. I have even thought it might be interesting that instead of connecting a power supply to the slip ring we might connect the slip ring to the common of our primary coils and then energize the field coils to make a generator that would have opposing AC signals. If you get a chance to try some of these ideas please post the results and I will do likewise. I just finished a major job on my wife's car so I should have a little more time.

Take care,
Carroll

[Ufopolitics]

Yes, that is the kind of motor you want. You will of course need to go back and read my post on how to modify it to work as a part G. The field coils are not used.

Carroll

Hello Citfta,

I've been thinking about adding some small resistors between element's hooks at commutator, in order to smooth the signal?

Also been wondering what would happen to signal plus to output results if you excite with a small current the stator coils?

...and maybe add a parallel cap at both stator coils in series after excitation to see if they would retain some energy, contributing this way to balance/increase inductance response.

I have not had the chance to play with your idea...but I do want to test it.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[citfta]

Yes, that is the kind of motor you want. You will of course need to go back and read my post on how to modify it to work as a part G. The field coils are not used.

Carroll

[Dwane]

Ac Series Motor

Hi Guys,
Is this what I am looking for. Series AC/DC motor. Not that anyone calls them that. I take it that there are two coils in the armature that are series connected and separated in the middle by the brushes? Get dual outputs.

[Ufopolitics]

Hello,

Well one thing I have been trying to explain all along here...is that when we FULLY excite a coil-core, it's Field "grows" radially whenever compared to the lowest input, and not "specifically" towards where secondary core is...(we only wish it would be a "FULLY directional growth"...but it ain't.)...And this fact causes huge losses all around SPATIAL area not utilized on the secondary induction.

And of course, a HIGH CONCENTRATION of the Field Will tend to displace towards where the other piece of ferromagnetic core is (Magnetic redirection)...Therefore, in geometry shape field would be like a distorted (pulled) ellipsoidal shape towards iron.

Figuera's Generator as is on the 1908 patent is PURELY LINEAR PLUS DIRECTIONAL Displacement of the homogeneous field composed by the two primaries.

Therefore, I would check first one primary attached to Citfta's part G, plus just the secondary CORE attached to this primary...then use MM suggestion with a paperclip JUST COVERING From Secondary Core CENTER to BOTH, RIGHT-LEFT ENDS...Then watch clip-needle displacement if it covers both extremes...As it "SHOULD" move that clip-needle all the way to other opposed extreme -of secondary core- at full excitement.

As when Part G is feeding that only primary at its MAX RESISTANCE value when we turn it by hand 180°, it should return idealistically at opposite extreme of core...but that ain't gonna happen unless we turn coil then field completely off...so the realistical goal we should have is -at least- that clip return to Center of secondary core.

Next step when successful would be to add the other primary...realizing that the repulsion force from both fields would take care of pushing the FORMED field all the way to each extreme of secondary core...wherever the needle-clip ends...that's where we should end our secondary coil...worthless to add it beyond travelling scope of the NN Field.

The way I see this field fluctuations to be really effective, is when they are very short in axis travelling length...I see faster response, with much less energy spent on primaries Fields...and the excess of energy will come at higher RPM'S.

Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Match

Hi Dwane,

Yes I believe any rotor with a commutator should work fine. From what I understand about the Figuera device the rotor size should match the size of the primary coils. I don't mean physically, I mean electrically. So that you get the proper back and forth action of the magnetic fields. I do NOT know how you would get that match except by experimentation. Maybe Ufo has some more input on that thought.

Take care,
Carroll

Hi citfta,

This is a strange application, but for the lack of anything better, I suggest using impedance match, partG to primary coils. Of course both parts need to handle the same current recognizing partG likely has two parallel paths. Impedance matching source to load is typical for maximum power transfer.

Regards,

bi

[citfta]

Hi Dwane,

Yes I believe any rotor with a commutator should work fine. From what I understand about the Figuera device the rotor size should match the size of the primary coils. I don't mean physically, I mean electrically. So that you get the proper back and forth action of the magnetic fields. I do NOT know how you would get that match except by experimentation. Maybe Ufo has some more input on that thought.

Take care,
Carroll