Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE - ALL SEATS SOLD OUT!

2018 Energy Science & Technology Conference
Sponsored by Teslacoin Foundation

Teslacoin Foundation

https://www.teslastarter.org


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 09-08-2014, 02:03 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Interesting Motor

I came across this picture on an antique website, I think it is some kind of motor but it could be a generator. I wondered if anyone knows anything about it?

I find the geometry quite interesting as I have built motors with a similar looking geometry that have unusual characteristics.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg motor10z.jpg (28.5 KB, 246 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #2  
Old 09-09-2014, 02:15 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
I believe this to be a universal motor so the pole faces cover almost half the armature at each side but could very easily be modified.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-09-2014, 03:51 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Most Probably DC Series Motor

Dear mbrownn,

I have looked at the motor image you posted. There are a number of features present that I think would not be found in a Universal Motor, as you suggest.

The first being that the base frame also seems to be the magnetic keeper between the stator coils. From the appearance, this frame looks like cast iron painted black. That would provide pretty bad eddy current losses for a varying field. The stator coils look like they are wound with a moderate sized wire covered with a plastic film of some kind.

So, while the coils could handle AC or DC, the lack of laminations in the stator core suggests DC operation.

The two main terminals on the Red Block on top appear to have wires that go to both the stator windings and at least one brush for the commutator on the back side. This looks like a series connection between the stator field and the armature. There is definitely a wire leading to the brush on the right. The wire from the terminal block to the brush on the left is ambiguous, but a wire definitely leaves the terminal block and goes somewhere. So, if the power supply was connected to the Left Brush and the other wire leaving the terminal block, that would produce a series connection.

DC Shunt Motor operation seems unlikely, primarily because the wire diameter is the same going to the stator coils as going to the armature brushes. The large pulley on the front suggests significant torque available from this motor which would require high currents running in the armature. Since the wire size is the same for the brushes and the stator coils, series connection seems the most likely, with a moderate DC voltage (like 50 to 100 VDC) necessary for operation.

That's what it looks like to me.

That, plus the oiling features for the bearings and cleaned up condition, it looks like a sweet machine, probably built before 1940. It may still have been in good running condition when the picture was taken.

Best regards,
Peter

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 09-09-2014 at 04:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-10-2014, 03:42 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Hi Peter, thanks for your response.

I agree with your analysis and conclusion that it is a DC motor and is conventional. I believe that it is possibly very old and designed to run on the Edison system, the clue to its age could be the type of brushes.

What drew my attention to this motor is the position of the coils, and although this actually makes no difference to how this motor works, motors can be built with this configuration that operate quite differently.

This purpose of this thread is to find out if any others have been heading in the same direction as me, using a 90 degree configuration, and open a discussion on the various possibilities.

I am still working on the same project as I was doing before when we exchanged a few ideas by email, and have made significant progress.

Now imagine that the brushes are rotated through 45 degrees and the top halves of the field poles have been removed, what do we now have? One field coil is being cut of the armature coil and one isnít.

If we power the field coil that is not being cut by the armature coil and the armature in attraction the motor turns. This is because the flux is bent through an acute angle when passing into the un-powered coil and tries to straighten. A BEMF or generated voltage occurs in the un-powered coil, BEMF occurs in the armature and little or no BEMF occurs in the powered field coil. Why is this?

This is because the flux is not sweeping across the powered field coil and is effectively almost static. Would you agree?

In tests a motor of this configuration draws a much higher current for the same input voltage and develops some more torque as a result. I chose to lower the input voltage to save burning out the coils. It would seem that an efficiency improvement has occurred but this needs to be replicated to confirm the results. Add to this the fact that we also have a generated output and the efficiency has risen again. My tests resulted in an overall efficiency around 70% which isn't too bad when the donor motor was only around 35% efficient.

There is much more but I want people to get their head around this concept first.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-10-2014, 04:25 AM
Allcanadian's Avatar
Allcanadian Allcanadian is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 659
@mbrownn
I love old stuff and it would seem to me in our modern age we have lost what I would call...character. Those old motors define an age when much was new and many of the hard and fast rules were yet to be written.

I too have explored the benefits of linear motor action however some general rules still apply. It is not unlike a modern induction motor in that the magnetic field is coupled between two magnetic sources thus if the stator field change is greater it is a motor action and if it is lesser it is a generator action. It may be either the coil moving with it's inherent magnetic field or the magnet field expanding/contracting however the rate of change of the field is what matters most.

I believe it may have been Faraday who said it does not matter how the field changes(physical motion or expansion/contraction) only that it does. Thus we are left with the notion that it may be up to us to imagine how we might cause a field change in a more efficient way. In any case I find something very attractive about oscillating motions and prefer them over spinning motion. It would seem to me oscillation is the universal motion and spin an after effect. Interesting stuff

AC
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-10-2014, 05:42 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allcanadian View Post
@mbrownn
It is not unlike a modern induction motor in that the magnetic field is coupled between two magnetic sources thus if the stator field change is greater it is a motor action and if it is lesser it is a generator action. It may be either the coil moving with it's inherent magnetic field or the magnet field expanding/contracting however the rate of change of the field is what matters most.

I believe it may have been Faraday who said it does not matter how the field changes(physical motion or expansion/contraction) only that it does. Thus we are left with the notion that it may be up to us to imagine how we might cause a field change in a more efficient way. In any case I find something very attractive about oscillating motions and prefer them over spinning motion. It would seem to me oscillation is the universal motion and spin an after effect. Interesting stuff
Correct, but in the case I put above we would be using DC and there would be no change in the intensity of the flux. I have put AC into my motor and got some very interesting results, but we will deal with the DC for now.

Used on DC we have a motor generator with the usable torque and a DC output from a single input. No its not enough to self run even if we put a generator on the output shaft, but we have narrowed the gap when compared to a standard motor. If we had a donor motor with an efficiency above 50% before we modify it, we could be very close . I have not tried replacing the powered field coil with a permanent magnet, but it would be interesting to measure the results of such an experiment and I encourage people to try it.

Remember that our generated output has to be less than our input but we also have the mechanical output available too. Normally in a universal type motor, there is BEMF in both field coils and both field coils are contributing to the torque, here the BEMF is in the generator coil and so is an output. the torque is also occurring in the generator coil.

There is no reason why the output current could not be run through the armature before going to the load as the armature typically has a very low resistance, this additional current in the armature adds to the torque and so compensates for the load being drawn to some extent The output torque does not drop as much as you would expect and in some specific cases does increase, but for different reasons. Think about this one because there are further implications.

Much about what I am proposing is counter intuitive.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-14-2014, 03:21 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
As motors like the one in the picture are no longer available, we have to choose a different donor motor. Any four pole motor similar in design to a starter motor would be good, preferably the armature has an even number of slots. This is because I propose a rewind of the armature. A standard lap wound armature with an odd number of slots can be used to achieve what I have mentioned above but has some characteristics that would work against us.

I have used starter motors and highly modified universal motors but I have been told that starter generators like you find on golf carts are simpler to work with. These are not available where I live.

The first step is to remove two adjacent coils and their pole pieces (I call them shoes), wire the armature and one of the field coils up in attraction by having the brushes in line with the powered field coil (this may vary slightly depending upon the winding of the armature). The motor may or may not turn at this stage, it just depends upon the shoe of the unused/generator coil. Adjust the brushes until the motor turns in a direction from the unused shoe towards the powered field coil.

The most common reason I and others have found for not being able to get it to run successfully is if the brushes are too wide thus the motor reaches magnetic lock before disconnecting with the correct segment on the commutator. Another reason can be the shape and size of the generator shoe.

Watch out for the current draw, it is likely to be high. I used 3v on a motor designed to run on 12v.

Theoretically a permanent magnet could be used as the powered field coil although this is something I have not tried. If you are using a permanent magnet four pole motor, you will have to improvise making the shoe and generator coil.

This is an attraction motor, so the shoe of the generator coil will have to be in position before it will turn to allow a return path for the flux. It is the angle of the flux passing through this shoe that causes the armature to turn, and if it were not in place the motor would just sit magnetically locked in position.
__________________
 

Last edited by mbrownn; 09-14-2014 at 03:27 PM. Reason: correcting an error
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-14-2014, 04:21 PM
wayne.ct wayne.ct is online now
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 535
Simple DC motor

What I see is a simple DC motor where the brushes apply current alternating between the two coils. Only one coil is powered at any one time. The rotor consists of a soft iron bar that aligns first with the one coil and then with the other. This motor will run in either direction and needs to be unloaded and given a push in the desired direction before applying power and a load. This motor is not practical in today's environment. We expect much more of any modern prime mover.
__________________
There is a reason why science has been successful and technology is widespread. Don't be afraid to do the math and apply the laws of physics.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-14-2014, 05:00 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by wayne.ct View Post
What I see is a simple DC motor where the brushes apply current alternating between the two coils. Only one coil is powered at any one time. The rotor consists of a soft iron bar that aligns first with the one coil and then with the other. This motor will run in either direction and needs to be unloaded and given a push in the desired direction before applying power and a load. This motor is not practical in today's environment. We expect much more of any modern prime mover.
Thanks for the response

Yes, you have an interesting interpretation of a 90 degree configured motor. I agree its a bit simple and impractical, but not without merit.

This design I'm putting forward here would give usable mechanical power plus a DC output which assists the motor to some extent. Its not the ultimate innovation in this simple form but shows a way forward. Its efficiency should be getting close to an induction motor which isn't too bad for a low voltage DC motor. As most of the parts are similar to a modern motor, little extra tooling is required for manufacture which is also good. When we look at automotive motors that are generally about 50% efficient or less this is quite good.

As a prime mover (high horse power) I donít think the DC version that I am talking about here will cut it, but the added DC output is quite a bonus for an electric motor on a car, as it reduces the draw on the alternator. Similarly the same could be said for ancillary motors on an electric vehicle. Im sure other applications would also come to light.

In truth, for this simple design we don't even have to power the field coil, only the armature, but by using a field coil or permanent magnet gives us additional torque making the device more practical as a motor.

I am going to stick with the DC version for now until people understand the method of its operation.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-15-2014, 02:24 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
I will try to help you understand what is going on. This is how I see it, if you disagree then feel free to say so, then we can work out between us what is correct in a civilised manor.

We are using Direct Current

Both pictures use a simplified armature winding.

The second picture is set up in attraction, a universal motor is both attraction and repulsion depending where you look on the armature.

The first picture is a universal type motor showing the lines of flux and the areas of greatest concentration of flux. These areas of greatest concentration are also the areas where the flux moves and varies in concentration the most, this is where and why BEMF is produced.

The second picture is my concept. note that the powered field coil has little or no change in the concentration of flux, thus little BEMF. The armature does have BEMF just as in the universal motor as will the unpowered coil (generator). Because of this we do not need to apply as much voltage to obtain the same current in the windings.

Another reason for the dramatic reduction in BEMF is that the armature windings tend to be fewer turns than the field windings in these types of motor. I have only bothered to count one motor as I stripped it and the ratio was approximately 3 to 1. This was backed up by achieving similar speeds with my motor at 3 to 4 volts as would have been obtained with 12v on the donor motor. Hence I say little or no BEMF in the field coil.

As the field strength is proportional to the current flow then the torque will be the same. ie same mechanical power for less input power and we get a gain in efficiency. Not 100% accurate but generally it is true.

It is the bunching of the flux combined with how the flux prefers a straighter path that causes the torque, this is how we can get torque without repulsion. In a universal motor we get both repulsion and bunching of flux so the torque should be higher in a universal motor than in my design and this does seem to be the case, but not by as big a margin as I expected. I think the lap winding compromise is the cause of this. We need more replications to confirm this.

The performance characteristics under load was slightly worse than a standard universal motor, ie the speed dropped quicker under load than a standard motor but our input power was a lot less. I would say we had 1/2 of the power out for 1/3rd of the input but could not accurately measure it.

If I had put a lap wound armature in the simulation you would see a lot more complexity and many more areas where BEMF are being generated, in fact it is so complex that is much harder to see how the torque is produced. The truth is the sum of the positive torque areas is greater than the sum of the negative torque areas so we still have good torque but not as much as we could have. A lap wound armature is a compromise. I wont go further into this because I want people to understand the concept I propose and not get confused. A simple armature winding works best in this case even if it does arc a lot, this can be eliminated by other means.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Universalmotor.JPG (264.4 KB, 73 views)
File Type: jpg Image1.jpg (89.3 KB, 99 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-15-2014, 03:20 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
As far as the brushes are concerned, it is difficult to generalise as there are so many different brushes and brush holders used on motors, and few are adjustable so you may have to be quite ingenious to make them so, but here is some general advice.

Carbon brushes tend to have quite a high resistance when compared to the armatures on these motors, I have measured some as high as 8 ohms while the armature itself was a very small fraction of an ohm. If you are going to replace your brushes then consider their resistance as you want it as low as possible. I like the idea of brushes similar to the ones in the picture I first posted as I understand their resistance was very low.

Generally speaking the contact force of the brushes with the commutator is made quite high which does introduce some friction, usually you can reduce this contact force considerably with little effect on the motor. Reducing the brush width increases the contact force on the commutator so we can reduce the brush spring force and still maintain good conductivity while lowering friction.

Normally a brush is wider than one segment of the commutator, this means that three segments can be in contact with the brush at the same time. this has several disadvantages but I will concentrate on three for now.

The first problem is the sweep of the powered coil across the generator shoe. If this sweep angle is too great, the motor will reach a point where it will want to reverse its rotation resulting in the armature stopping rotation while still connected to the supply. Obviously this will result in an armature burn out. Thinning out the brushes can help here to reduce the angle that the powered armature coil sweeps across the generator face. I cannot mention this without mentioning the commutator, some motors have the same number of commutator bars as slots on the armature, some have double that number. I found that having double the number was better to get the right sweep angle.

The second problem is having three segments powered at the same time introduces transformer interactions between the armature coils as well as coil shorting. This all effects the inductance of the armature and introduces a lot of transients going in both directions, narrowing the brushes to one segment width or less simplifies this condition especially if your using a lap wound armature.

Very high voltages can build up in the armature causing brush and commutator damage at an alarming rate as we have no compensation coil to minimise this. I will go into how we remove this power with a second set of brushes at a later date but some of you will be able to figure it out. Reducing the brush width has a positive effect here as far as we are concerned especially with a simple rewound armature. More on this later.

Obviously choosing a donor motor with brush carriers that can easily be modified is better. Again some of the Delco starter generators look a better candidate than the starter motors that I used.

Brush timing and sweep angle are very important in getting good performance out of this design.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #12  
Old 09-17-2014, 07:15 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
When you have built this motor to this stage, it would be good to get some figures on it to add to what we already have. You will need to run at a lower voltage to prevent burning out the coils.

Assuming you run at the same amps as the unloaded donor motor, what is the input voltage?
what is the input current?
What is the output voltage from the generator coil?
What is the speed of the motor?

Now you will need to load the generator with a relatively low impedance load such as a lamp. you may need to experiment with different lamps to get full brightness.

What is the input voltage?
what is the input current?
What is the output voltage from the generator coil?
What is the output current from the generator coil?
What is the speed of the motor?

Now repeat the test with the output passing through a diode and through the armature or entire motor.

What is the input voltage?
what is the input current?
What is the output voltage from the generator coil after the motor?
What is the output current from the generator coil after the motor?
What is the speed of the motor?

Now the tests can be repeated with a mechanical load added, so you will need to make a basic torque measuring device, see picture.

This is made from a hard wood and a set of weighing scales. for foot pounds cut the wood to 2 feet in length so you have a 1 foot radius and for kgm cut 2 meters in length. the reason why we have the wood 2 units in length is so that the weight of the wood either side of the shaft is in balance.

Slowly tighten the screw until the motor measures the rated current draw for the donor motor.

Your output voltage will be lower because of the reduced speed, so you may need a new set of lamps.

What is the input voltage?
What is the input current?
What is the output voltage from the generator coil after the motor?
What is the output current from the generator coil after the motor?
What is the torque and speed?

You will notice that your new motor is drawing significantly less power for the same amps, but your output power is lower too Has there been an improvement in efficiency mechanically?
What's the efficiency when you include the electrical output?

At this stage you will be well aware of the arcing at the brushes, If you place a scope on the input and the output you will also see spikes in voltage so the next step will be curing that problem and this is also a part of the efficiency improvements.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ballance.JPG (11.1 KB, 37 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-19-2014, 02:43 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Efficiency improvements 1 & 2

Efficiency improvement number1 has been described above and is the thinning of the brushes combined with the reduction of the spring force causing a reduction in friction on the commutator. I don't think I need to say much more, other than the efficiency gains are magnified by operating the motor at a lower power. Normally the effect would be less than 1or 2 percent but if we half the power it is doubled and at ľ of the power it is quadrupled.

Efficiency improvement number 2 has also been described above but needs more explanation. This is passing the DC output of the generator through the armature or motor.

Passing a current through a coil creates a magnetic field, increasing that current will increase the field, and therefore the increase the mechanical power of a motor.

If our motor has 2 supplies, one being from a battery and the other being from a generator, that load will be shared between the two supplies. By using our load (generator) as the second supply we cause more current draw from the motor much of which will be supplied by the generator. Because of this the current drawn from the source battery will not increase as much as expected. Provided we have sufficient voltage in our generator the current passed through the motor from the generator can also power a second load in series too. This is because the voltage drop across the motor coils is low due to their low ohmic resistance.

In effect we are using our electrical draw from the generator to compensate for the increased load on the motor by passing its current through the motor windings first. Yes, the motor will slow but by not as much as expected. The lower the voltage requirement of our electrical load the more current drawn and the greater the compensation.

It is therefore sensible to have our loaded output voltage of the generator not much higher than the motor supply voltage.

It may be necessary to change the number of turns on the generator coil to achieve this.

More to come
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-19-2014, 05:13 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Efficiency improvement 3

Im sure you are all concerned at the arcing at the brushes so now is the time to address that.

Because of the way using a commutator rapidly and abruptly switches on and off the coils in the armature we get inductive kickback and transients in the armature coils, if we are using a standard lap wound armature, these currents are usually dissipated in the coils as they are wired in a loop, but the voltage in the armature rises causing arcing and heat is produced in the coils. This is normally minimized by having a compensation coil. In a universal motor this is the second field coil that is wired in series with the first field coil. Via transformer actions these spikes are transmitted to the field coil. We don't have such a coil fitted, and as we have changed the geometry of the motor, it will not work effectively.

The alternative I propose is a second set of brushes that follow the brushes powering the motor. They must be set to contact the commutator segment just as the power brushes disconnect. This way the spikes can pass to a second circuit away from the motor. We could just short these brushes out but to me that is a waste of energy, so I suggest we capture that energy in a capacitor via a diode.

To make practical use of this energy we could use it as an output, but I suggest we use it to reduce the input. This is done by placing the capacitor across the source supply, but separating it from the source with a second diode. A third diode will be required to prevent a short circuit. Your circuit will look something like the picture but you will need the values of the components to match your device.

The recovery is small with a lap wound armature and may only be a few percent, but worth the effort.

If this effects your motor performance it is because the sweep angle of your armature is now two coils of the armature, so you need to keep your eye on that.

To be continued....
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Screenshot from 2014-09-19 13:01:03.jpg (10.3 KB, 60 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-21-2014, 01:18 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Efficiency improvement 4

Efficiency improvement 4 gives a dramatic improvement in both mechanical and generated output. You may have been wondering about the second half of the case, and why I did not do anything with it until now. It is because I wanted you to understand the concept of building a low BEMF motor.

All we have to do is put the coils in the second half of the case, but there is a problem. If we do this we get a magnetic short circuit and the motor fails to turn, so before this we have to slot the case longitudinally (along the axis) separating it into two magnetic circuits (see picture). Some of you may have seen a device with this feature before These slots need to be about 10mm wide and as long as you can get without the case deforming under load. Better still cut it completely in half and then braze it back together leaving the 10mm wide slots. This is assuming that the front and rear caps are non magnetic and will not cause the magnetic short.

Wire the field coil opposite our original power field coil in series and in attraction, the extra resistance will cause a very small drop in input power but the extra generator pole will almost double torque and generator outputs as well as BEMF in the armature.

The outputs of the two generator coils can be wired in series or parallel, either one or both being fed through the motor depending on your requirements. One coil could be solely for compensating the load on the armature i.e passed through the armature/motor and shorted on itself, with the other powering an external load.

It will run on AC but in this case we cannot have the capacitor across the source as the phasing of the recovery is wrong. There are advantages and disadvantages to AC use which I will cover in another thread at a later date.

By passing the generator current through the armature, we can also use this as a normal self exciting DC generator and not power the field coils. All we have to do is crank it.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg coilsetup.JPG (250.1 KB, 110 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:53 AM
citfta's Avatar
citfta citfta is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,297
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
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-19-2015, 02:29 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by citfta View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citfta View Post
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 donít.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citfta View Post
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 isnít 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.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-19-2015, 11:01 AM
shylo shylo is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 594
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
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-19-2015, 11:38 AM
citfta's Avatar
citfta citfta is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,297
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
__________________
 

Last edited by citfta; 10-06-2015 at 09:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-19-2015, 12:54 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by citfta View Post
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 havenít 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 elseís 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.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:16 PM
citfta's Avatar
citfta citfta is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,297
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
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #22  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:30 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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.
__________________
 

Last edited by mbrownn; 05-19-2015 at 01:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-20-2015, 09:29 AM
shylo shylo is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 594
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
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 082.JPG (124.1 KB, 48 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-20-2015, 11:15 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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 isnít 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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
Path of least resistance?
Yes, you could say the flux follows the path of least resistance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
"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.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-20-2015, 11:53 AM
citfta's Avatar
citfta citfta is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,297
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
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-20-2015, 01:18 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by citfta View Post
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.
__________________
 

Last edited by mbrownn; 05-20-2015 at 01:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-20-2015, 02:10 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
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.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_0007.jpg (129.7 KB, 443 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-20-2015, 10:44 PM
shylo shylo is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 594
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.
__________________
 

Last edited by shylo; 05-20-2015 at 10:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-21-2015, 12:52 AM
citfta's Avatar
citfta citfta is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,297
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
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-21-2015, 03:39 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shylo View Post
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.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bemf, generator, motor, interesting

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers