My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines

[Midaztouch]

Thank you for finally waking up! If you would have taken the time to listen to me before, you wouldn't be upset. The group wing was a extremely weak. Hunting Ross proved what DADHAV and I knew. The symetric motor was better and it will have stronger torque than you pair winds also. No matter how many fancy tricks you do, your motor designs will never give OVERUNITY!. Sorry UFO

You PRIDE is sinful! The symetric motor will have more torque than your pair wind, if you use the same copper gauge and turns. A fair test comparison! You scream about the power of "MY MACHINES". (Don't you mean Tesla's Machines!?) We used 3x more copper on the NS Imperial than the OEM Imperial. That is an unfair advantage. The NS design was the only design that can match the torque of an OEM motor... Add a 80% load to your ALL NORTH designs & the OEM. Which motor will start to smoke first? ... You thought I was going to let you off the hook easy!? Wrong!! It's 80% load of the OEMs torque weight. 3x the copper and measuring RPMs under no load... You have great showmanship. I'll give you that much



Look UFO, the smoke show is over! Your all North wind designs have all failed head to head with the symetric motor! That's why all of the GREAT BUILDERS HAVE GONE! And that's why you have begun work on other machines by Tesla. What you have done here was/is a great tool for learning but, as you can see, I already moved on.

Your right, I had to build that Imperial 4x!!! That at least 120 hours of building!!! And you say I don't know these motors!? WTF i have more building time than all members that have joined this thread. I learnt how to build it a a famous professional businesses here in Japan. MY build skill & knowledge of the Imperial and you rather designs is excellent!!! Dana, Kogs, Cornboy, machinealve and the rest of the Team saw me do it.



Thank you for teaching me and the rest of the team on how to build Tesla's Asymetric Motors. If it wasn't for you, I would have never been able to reach the full potential of living my dream. To build a Championship Electric Motorcycle!


It's sad that you are trying to take credit for TESAL'S WORK! And yes, I'm doing it the way it should be done. I designed an ELECTROMAGNETIC REACTOR by TESLA

Im still editing

[Ufopolitics]

UFO


Group winds: High RPMs & lowest torque(max magnetic density is near near the 0 zero torque zone

Pair winds: High RPMs & medium torque(max magnetic density is spread out between N stator & half of the S Stator

UFO was very upset with the two above statements. I wasn't trying to discredit him. It was just my observation compared to the Singular Coil wind.. So, I put my money where my mouth is. Time to blow the dust off of my Imperial and build the A1 Mo-Gen

Singular winds: Lower RPMs & highest torque(max magnetic density is concentrated on the Stator Bisector

YOU ARE MISLEADING MY WHOLE WORK HERE PLUS CONFUSING ALL PEOPLE READING HERE AND ON WHOLE FORUM.

YOU ARE MAKING ME LEAVE WHAT AM DOING AT THE TIME, TO COME HERE TO CORRECT ALL THE ERRORS YOU ARE SPREADING HERE ALL OVER THE ENERGETIC FORUM.

REALIZE THAT NO MATTER HOW MANY THREADS YOU OPEN, IF THEY RELATE TO ASYMMETRICAL MACHINES REFLECTS ON MY WORK HERE.

..Isn't that a reason to get upset?

Your "observations" and "conclusions" are dead wrong, they are both based in "assumptions", just because you have built NONE of the All North Pairs, NONE of the All North Groups on your Imperial. THEREFORE YOU CAN NOT JUDGE!!, PERIOD!

And so, no one have shown them here either...So how could you just freely have the AUDACITY to CONCLUDE about torque as being "medium" or "lowest"??!!...NONSENSE and PATHETIC!!

Science is based in FACTS, in REAL Builds, not in Air Inflated Theories, just because you think you read for "X" amount of hours this Thread...that makes you so good you think you know it all?

Even the North South Pairs built in the very beginning of this Thread have a HECK of a Torque!

WATCH:


ASYMMETRIC BOSCH MOTOR WOUND NORTH-SOUTH

AND...

ASYMMETRIC NORTH-SOUTH DUAL PENTAGON/550 MOTOR

ASYMMETRIC IMPERIAL TORQUE TEST

And so every single CAD Design shown here from small, medium and larger applications I have done so far-WERE BUILT FOR REAL, NO "AIR THEORIES" - and ALL have demonstrated High Torque as well as High Speed.

And the list keep going on and on...

ALL NORTH VERSUS NORTH SOUTH SMALL MOTOR

ALL NORTH BOSCH TEST


The 'thing' is that I HAVE THE PROOF IN REALITY ALL OF THEM WORK JUST FINE, AND YOU DON'T!

One or two frustrated replications are NEVER going to be threat to all the many SUCCESSFUL Replications done here previously.


So...You have the AUDACITY to come here and write all that BS above, without You building just a single cheap and lousy small motor in the all north configuration.

Your "attempt" Replicating the North South Imperial was a FAILURE, after you had to wind it so many times, so many times I lost the count. And it is NOT my fault about your incapability to do the work properly.

So, I put my money where my mouth is...

What I really recommend is to ENGAGE PROPERLY Your "Mouth" with your Brain...before you spend your money.

I don't care about through out angles.(TOW) Save that for some rookie! I care about the research for the A1 Mo-Gen. Got it!

What are You?..."An Experience Builder"?...With MANY Replications in all sizes and 'colors'...

Give Me a BRAKE !

Your ideas of group and pair winds will NOT give the full potential for Teasla's Electromagnetic Reactor. What I am doing is Strengthening the foundation for A1 Mo-Gen to have maximum magnetic efficiency! In spite of what you think, the Amps are what the should be. Get you calulators out and do my equation: Length of One coil is 6 meters, 18awg @ 23turns at 48volts... Do you still think the Amps are too high, not enough or... It's fine?

You are completely FULL OF "IT".

Again WATCH ABOVE VIDEOS.

Your "A1 Mo-Gen" BS will NEVER, -read me well here- NEVER could be even compared to ANY -of even previous, earlier- models that I have built in the past two years.

Did you read my section about about "How the A1 Mo-Gen works with extra brush set or wider brushes sets?" Comment on this part. It's important! Wake up and get on the same page as me.


Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

I did read that pure non sense, why do you need more brushes?...Adding MORE MECHANICAL DRAG TO AN ALREADY WEAK MACHINE IS SMART?...WAY TO GO!!...

So...Two PAIR of Brushes aren't enough to get your "A1 Mo-Gen" spinning?...so you need all Eight Brushes (Four Pairs) for Motor and "Two Extra" for Generator?...

I do NOT base all my writings and conclusions on "AIR THEORIES"...but in REAL MOTOR ANALYSIS, NO BS...but obviously, you still, even after reading so much here, have not realized it yet.


You wrote below, meaning, You 'believe' you "know it all by now" right?...:

I don't care about through out angles.(TOW) Save that for some rookie!

It is not "through" Angles...it is spelled "Throw"...from throwing, shutting.

Well, below is "Your" "Through Out Angles" only for rookies right?...in your so powerful "A1 Mo-Gen"...

[IMG][/IMG]

Above is the "A1 Mo-Gen" at its WIDEST THROW (this is how you spell it)...it means SHUTTING OUT ANGLE..

NOW, look at All North DUAL PAIRS BEING FIRED below:

[IMG][/IMG]

P.S. Your CAD work is always spot on!

I know that!, I am sure of that...I do not need you to tell me, just because...am sure of it...

But now could You see the difference Guy?...or are you still blinded by your own ego to make your "A1 Mo-Gen" as the Best ever designed concept Motor in the Universe"?

I do not think you can see it...otherwise you would have never gotten so far on this NON SENSE BS.

Can You be able to REALIZE that at MAX Firing your "design" MAGNETIZES EXACTLY TWELVE POLES ACROSS, FROM A TOTAL OF TWENTY EIGHT?

HOW MANY DEAD, INERT, INACTIVE POLES IS YOUR "DESIGN" LEAVING IN A "LIMBO"?...Do your simple Math...SIXTEEN POLES DEAD +, PLUS ALL THEIR RESPECTIVE "SINGLE COILS" ...TONS OF INACTIVE COPPER DOING ABSOLUTELY NADA, NOTHING, EXCEPT CONTRIBUTING TO MORE WEIGHT DRAG FOR THOSE TWO POOR, WEAK AND SMALL "SINGLE COILS"!!

VERSUS: ALL NORTH PAIRS FIRE, ENERGIZE AT MAX EXACTLY TWENTY TWO POLES (22) OUT OF TWENTY EIGHT (28)...LEAVING JUST SIX DEAD POLES ACROSS ?



Still not seeing it?

I INVENTED THIS TECHNOLOGY Guy, as the THROW Angle which came in the Asymmetrical Motor "Package", since Symmetry ALWAYS have Same Symmetrical Angles...no matter what size the motor structure is, Angles only changes between Two and Four Brush Systems. In Asymmetry We could VARY this TOW Angle AS MUCH AS WE PLEASE.

Wider THROW Angle(s) means HIGH TORQUE and HIGH SPEED in the same, exact "PLATTER"...something that Symmetry can NEVER DO...

So, in conclusion, all the work you are doing in this "Single Coils" Imperial winding is going to deliver a very slow machine, slower than molasses when dripping...

As well as a LOW TORQUE MOMENTUM (I don't know if you know what that means....and I will not waste my time explaining...keep going back and read more, Oh!, but maybe that is for "rookies" right?) when you load mechanically this machine. In order to achieve Higher spec's you will need over 100 volts and many, many amps...so, start buying all this "Huge Power Plant" to move it properly.

Your great "Discovery" and "Theory" about "Warm Temperature Existence on Liquids" ..., may work fine in smaller scale Two Stator motors like Radio Shack...but NOT on big size machines like Imperial or bigger, just because Rotor Total Weight and Displacement versus TOW Angle is not distributed evenly, or compensated, balanced, etc in the machine GEOMETRY.

For everyone's information, "grabbing" the 5poles would have more torque than then 7poles, not the same amount.

I tried to help you out before Midaz...when I suggested Seven Pole Coils...but you turned out LOUD against me in your wrong response - to EVERYONE's Information- ADDRESSING MY READERS saying that five poles coils would be higher torque than seven...COMPLETELY DEAD WRONG ASSUMPTION!!!

A SEVEN POLE COIL HAVE A WIDER ANGLE OF DISPLACEMENT CALLED TOW, -ignored by you- AS WELL AS MORE IRON CORE than a five pole coil.

Ignorance at its MAX, and on top of that WITH AN ATTITUDE??!!...THAT IS UNBELIEVABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE !

My patience is over with you. You finished it.

You see...I do NOT have to "get on your page" Guy...I INVENTED this Machines, capisci? dig it?...it means "I WROTE THE BOOK ON ASYMMETRICAL MACHINES" . So it is the opposite, or you will be falling face down to this planet surface when you fire it.

Finally I would ask you to please do NOT post here anymore, You've decided to Open Your Own Thread, which have a LOT OF ROOM for you to write there about your machine.

This would be my last post related to ALL THIS NOISE you are making here, distracting and CONFUSING all the Members that are trying to read the REAL MATERIAL displayed BY ME here for over two years.

I am EXTREMELY BUSY, to come here to waste my time in arguments like this.


Enjoy your A1 Mo-Gen "Beast" ...


Ufopolitics


P.D: And please...feel free to publish this Post along with My CAD Diagrams on your Thread, if you'd like to...see if anyone would help you there...so this conversation is AWAY from here.

Your Attitude pushed me to make this response Midaz, you forced me to correct your errors because they involve my whole work here, and believe me, I was NOT pleased to write all of the above.

[Midaztouch]

Team

Finished winding the Imperial. Rotor mass is 8.3kg

http://www.energeticforum.com/showthread.php?p=270424#post270424

Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[sampojo]

Quad Unipolar 10 pole quad-filar coming along

Quad-filar 32ga. perfecto! Take a look at slot 3-4, that one is done and filled to the top. I have 7 groups wound. Using just shy of calculated 1-ohm length, at 22'. But this last one, Group 4, I thought it wise to leave 2' off, for coil group five to fit. Estimating connection resistances to add enough extra resistance to keep it up. Expect to finish winding tomorrow. slow speed tests, balancing, and coil stabilization with coat of epoxy to follow. Some Shakedown tests after that.



Here is the other side of the Group 4 coil going through slot 6-7. Guess you can't tell but it came in a tad bit fuller than the slot 3-4. This slot is also complete. Just enough room to get my type of fence in for this motor.

[Ufopolitics]

Welcome here!

Hello All,
I'm new to the energeticforum and discovered this Asymmetrical Motor stuff not more than 2 weeks ago. I see there is a couple years of postings here, so I doubt I'll get through it all anytime soon. Nevertheless Here are some pics of my first grade level build in progress. (I hope you guys don't mind more replications on this level.)

I found a couple Radio Shack that were going out of business and got a bunch of stuff including 3 motors for half off!
By hand I painstakingly sawed the two motors shells in just the right spots. I don't have a welder, but I used FiberFix to attach the two sections and it came out great! It is very very strong. I was even able to use a file to expose the openings on the shell section covered with the FiberFix!







It is still in progress (can't find anyone local with magnet wire
I post a YouTube once it is done.

I might also try to take a few of these motors and combine the armatures and shells to make one with a very long armature.

Thanks!
MagnaMoRo
MagnaMoRo on YouTube.

Hello Magna,

Welcome here friend!

I believe Radio Shack still sells magnetic wire in small rolls of 30, 26 and 22, the 30 is red, 26 is green and 22 is gold (copper color)

One roll would be enough to wind your motor.

Take a look at this 3D CAD video of the All North winding (recommended) of a single pair shown here, you will need to wind five like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-c...-ts=1421914688

Then watch the video below to see more about the designs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diY96XR76Fg


The All North CAD...

[IMG][/IMG]


Good luck on your work and thanks for giving it a try.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Imperial Single Coils (5 pole coils)

Team

Winding the Imperial A1 Mo-Gen. My hands Hurt from pulling that 18agw @ 23 turns! You Can fit 30 turns if you want.

UFO, I don't remember checking the timing on the rear of the machine on the N/S like I did this time.
Let's use yours & machinealive's results of the N/S Imperial. (Waiting for Kogs results to compair agianst your results.)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DakzuH9hauU

Keep it Clean and Green
Midaz

[/IMG]

The main problem I see by using single coils is the very narrow Interaction Angles, this shortage on electromagnetic interactions results in a slower machine, great torque, but slower than Twin Coils or Five Coils Groups, which end up grabbing Twice as much poles as of a single coil structure.

That is the main reason why I designed Dual Coils or Pairs and Groups on this Machines...to WIDEN the Interaction Angles or as I have called them all along this Thread...Throw Out Angles (TOW[/IMG]

Still, you will have a Repulse Mode prevailing at all times, and increasing when firing reversed voltage polarity at Generator Gates (Four Inputs). Attract mode will always be weaker even at seven poles coils. Meaning, Amperage would be higher than spreading EVEN Interactions between Repulse-Attract through whole Machine.


*/End of "Technicalities".../*


I am doing all this work here...just because I see you are starting to wind...as you are encouraging other Imperial owners to do it your way...so, you are advised already...no crying later.

So far I have not seen just ONE single replication of the All North Pairs nor Groups of the P56 Imperial here...Therefore, we can not tell how good or how bad is this design concept...but, now, you are rushing to make your own design happen, before trying the previous All North ones...

I am just writing on this post, about exactly, what would happen when you are finished...PLUS, I am helping you out to make it better...



So, again, I wish you the best of luck on your work.


Ufopolitics

[MagnaMoRo]

Another RS 5P replication

Hello All,
I'm new to the energeticforum and discovered this Asymmetrical Motor stuff not more than 2 weeks ago. I see there is a couple years of postings here, so I doubt I'll get through it all anytime soon. Nevertheless Here are some pics of my first grade level build in progress. (I hope you guys don't mind more replications on this level.)

I found a couple Radio Shack that were going out of business and got a bunch of stuff including 3 motors for half off!
By hand I painstakingly sawed the two motors shells in just the right spots. I don't have a welder, but I used FiberFix to attach the two sections and it came out great! It is very very strong. I was even able to use a file to expose the openings on the shell section covered with the FiberFix!







It is still in progress (can't find anyone local with magnet wire
I post a YouTube once it is done.

I might also try to take a few of these motors and combine the armatures and shells to make one with a very long armature.

Thanks!
MagnaMoRo
MagnaMoRo on YouTube.

[iankoglin]

Greetings:

(I wonder how Kog's Nessie is coming along?)

GlenWV

G'day Glen UFO and the rest of the team
I have not done any thing more on Nessie or any other projects here as I am still trying to get my boat finished I keep getting and doing small jobs to get the finances to Firstly to complete My boat then I need about $1000.00 to purchase a battery for Nessie then I will finish her
I just looked in here to day to catch up in what is happening as tomorrow a friend has asked me to show his nephew what Motors I am working on
Kindest Regards to all

Kogs still here

[sampojo]

my 10 pole unipolar winding project multifilar calcs

Hello Sam,

I have seen your trifilar winding...it needs more strands friend, in order to generate together a huge magnetic field that would move that steel mass properly. I would say Six to Nine total strands of that fine wire.

Forget about their 'formation'...triangular, flat etc...twist them together to make like a single strand, or a cable, keeping a circular cross section pattern on the whole coil. And try to calculate in order to fill as much as you could the empty spaces in each slot.

You will then see the results...


Regards



Ufopolitics

Thanks Ufo.

So to get one ohm per coil on quadfilar 32ga, it needs 24' From the looks of the trifilar 50% done, I thought I could go to the quad. my QP10 winding took 16' of 26ga and that was stuffed, coming in light on the ohms about .7 ohm and it has a heating issue. a penta-filar winding 32ga would have to be 30' per coil. This is how long my double rotor motor wire coils are of 26ga, this style motor. Geez gonna take me a day just to do all of Dana's calcs to figure this out... but a 1ohm coil of 5 wires at 30' is getting pretty close or over the 26ga cross sectional area, from the seat of my pants, thus matching the needs of my double rotor size, not my single rotor designs. So it seems 6-9 wires could not possibly work, requiring over 36' min for 1 ohm. So here I ponder, delay wrapping, and calculate or do seat of pants... Hard to lay out more than 25' in my basement too. Guess I will go with trying to wrap one quad and see how it looks...


AHA, cross-sectional area comparison says quadfilar is near-perfect fit to match 26ga. Now 1 ohm is 24 feet vs my 16ft wrap jobs before on 26ga (less than an ohm) So obviously I am betting that the multifilar conservation of space will allow me to get only a 33% increase in length packed in... I think this might work...

Here goes nuttin...

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

Regarding this pole winding subtending 2 poles, I thought maybe the design would be more like the 3-pole where one coil would only be wrapped around one pole.

Sam,

That is what I thought also, but due to the Geometry of the Three Poles and other larger number of poles it can only be done this way, comprehending with the single coils about same area of stators circumference...otherwise, we will get 'clock movement' rotation speed if we do each coil per each single pole....imagine on the Imperial...we will need 56 Single little coils on each slot...the 'thing' will move like the 'Minute' needle on a clock...

Would this coil design be completely wrong in your analysis?

Not necessarily wrong, it would definitively work...on the overall behavior, result and performance I couldn't say till we build it.

As you know I have been working on 10-pole and 20-pole motors. If they are adapted to this design, one of the 10-pole coils would wrap 4 poles.

Would it be a bad Idea to wrap the inner 2 poles with a tighter coil all part of the same coil?

The way I figure it it is always a good thing to fill all space with copper wire, no?

Sam

That is a great idea Sam, turning inner centered small coils will definitively strengthen their magnetic field...it is the 'Pyramid' Magnetic Concept applied here. The only thing is...you would have conflict overlapping coils...since you have taken the slots space to do it...overlapping coils in any Motor (Symmetrical or Asymmetrical) will deliver a smoother rotation...while single, non overlapped coils are more 'static' over time, they will deliver a 'stepper motor like' rotation.

Have you ever built an Asymmetrical Three Poles?

If you have, then feed it at very low inputs...and notice how it "Steps"...of course the higher the speed the less noticeable the stepping effect.

Stepping effect should have great torque, but lower speed than overlapped coils.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[sampojo]

one pole not two?

Hello my friend Midaz, Hello to All,


Ok,Midaz, after we exchange some mails, I think I've got your idea and points.

This concept will work, no doubt about that, and I believe you are right about concentrating the magnetic field within a single coil will 'compact' (let me say it this way) the strength in lesser poles and will not split coils in two. This splitting deviates the bisector angle,or it becomes two bisectors...either one, and yes, it will weaken it somehow. I was going by flux transfer at common shared coils from one to the other...

I like to try this in a Radio Shack first...and see what it does.

If I got it right, the CAD Diagram should look like below:


[IMG][/IMG]

The only thing that must be done for it to be timed properly, would be to move for a short angle the brushes towards the rotation sense...like 5 to 10 degrees in order to avoid bisector engagement between stators and coil being fired.

Either move the brushes...or rotate both commutators to proper angle (counter to rotation) when assembling rotor, then have brushes at exact alignment to stators center.

So, yeah, let's give it a try friend...we never know, we are all experimenting here....and this is a 'Democracy' here in the Open Source spirit...

I like the simplicity of this configuration...and like I said...You are right, it makes sense...You may have seen what I have missed prior when dissecting the three poles and starting to walk into the All North concept.

For comparison purposes I will wind the RS Motor this way with the same number of turns and gauge, as I did when I made the video where N-S Pairs versus All North Pairs was made, differentiating from the all N Pairs that I would try to fit the two coils total turns into just one coil and two poles.

I will try to "squeeze" this new project in front of my BIG pile of pending work...


Regards Friend


Ufopolitics

Ufo,

Regarding this pole winding subtending 2 poles, I thought maybe the design would be more like the 3-pole where one coil would only be wrapped around one pole.

Would this coil design be completely wrong in your analysis?

As you know I have been working on 10-pole and 20-pole motors. If they are adapted to this design, one of the 10-pole coils would wrap 4 poles.

Would it be a bad Idea to wrap the inner 2 poles with a tighter coil all part of the same coil?

The way I figure it it is always a good thing to fill all space with copper wire, no?

Sam

[Ufopolitics]

More Strands of wire...

Yes I was assuming a hard triangular formation for a trifilar wire, but your way of doing it as a single strand calculation is quite proper as I see the strands spread out and lay flat as I wind. I always based it on ratios of areas starting with the number of winds that came off the old winding (if it did not fill the cavity I made an eyeball adjustment as far as percent filled, too). That has worked OK but assigning a hard geometric shape to a multifilar and computing its area is not right.

Hello Sam,

I have seen your trifilar winding...it needs more strands friend, in order to generate together a huge magnetic field that would move that steel mass properly. I would say Six to Nine total strands of that fine wire.

Forget about their 'formation'...triangular, flat etc...twist them together to make like a single strand, or a cable, keeping a circular cross section pattern on the whole coil. And try to calculate in order to fill as much as you could the empty spaces in each slot.

You will then see the results...


Regards



Ufopolitics

[sampojo]

Raphael Big shift in Physics theory portended?

have you tried this MODEL?



why do I suggest this model?

call me a copy-KAt theorist ...

https://at37.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/4-ages-model-age-of-iron-solar-wind-and-our-magnetic-field/

selah

I played the video from MIT "The New Universal Magnetic Theory" and am totally shocked that they state unequivocally black holes, dark energy, and dark matter to not exist. Funny how that shape of the magnetic field looks so like aether theory of matter with its spin and momentum postulates. And @Ufo this X shape of the field has implications for motors and winding possibly... But probably has been taken into account by such things as finding the best timing for a motor by experimentation.

[Ufopolitics]

@ufo
I was looking at the new drawing of the wind that you and Midaz are proposing and this looks like you are winding it to be in repulsion mode, As in the R/S wind. Is this correct? It looks as if both coil 1 and coil 2 are receiving energy from the brushes with coil 1 bisector slightly off the bisector of the north stator and both being North poles in opposition to each other. But I noticed that you have reoriented your brushes and they are positioned differently than either of the R/S or all north embodiments. In the R/S embodiment the brushes are located in a line drawn across the separations between the N + S pole stators and in the all north embodiment the brushes are located in the position of the original embodiment. Here the brushes seem to be rotated cw about 15 degrees or so from the original embodiment. I have about 25 degrees of adjustment built in to both embodiments, these are actually goldmine 5 coil motors not R/S. I have stripped a number of motors recently in preparation for this project, I have been working on a number of other projects that I felt that I needed to get out of the way first.

Hello Garry,

Yes, correct, that first CAD was based on repulsion mode, however, it could be easily converted to higher percentage of 'Attract Mode'...watch:

[IMG]

My other question is how this affects the coil that the generator brushes are contacting on the opposite side of the rotor? I have noticed a significant increase in power in all of the winds when both of these coils are fed power in opposition to the polarity of the magnet.

Excellent question!

There is a 'Critical Angle' that must never be met between Input and Output (Motor & Generator sides), otherwise they could cancel or decrease strength between each others. That is the reason why I designed the 'Pairs' and the Groups of coils and not a Single Coil, we are 'bending' this way the magnetic field to avoid central shaft encounter...single coils are easier to encounter each others in the wrong angle, with the wrong set up, and orientation.

[IMG][/IMG]

If you notice in the Repulse mode Diagram positioning above, I am firing C1 and C2, while at 'Plenum' contact (centered) in the output Generator Brush Element.

This means that C4 must be fed reversed from the way we feed Input (or the same way Gen Outputs 'Naturally') to assist rotation...so we will have that the orientation between the Two Single Motor Coils (C1-C2) and Generator Coil (C4) be:

[Motor C1-C2]N/S>O [Iron Shaft]>N/S [C4 Generator]

Normally, if this is done in any magnetic arrangement, they will 'fuse' or attract together towards the center which -in this case- is the center shaft. Now, they could either magnify their strength by assisting each others (they do that in isolated cases, without a huge piece of steel in between), delivering a higher output at end poles, positively in this case, resulting in optimal performance...or, negatively, they could 'sink' all magnetic strength into the iron shaft embodiment, then loosing power at end poles...meaning, it MUST be tested to know which way they go, no 'Theory' works here but a real build my friend.

The best method is to test the theory and see how it works out. I recently broke one of the coils on my all north wind testing it to destruction in a test involving pulsing the cold electricity coil and using a 1000uf 120 volt capacitor to pump up the voltage from a 12 volt battery. I found that when I pulsed it leaving the duty cycle at about 20% the cap would pump up to almost 200 volts in a few seconds and then I had a switch that would allow the cap to empty the voltage into the all north motor as a load. Well this is obviously too much voltage and too much amperage for the design of this little motor but surprisingly it did not self destruct as I thought it would. In my mind I thought that it could not possibly handle the amperage and voltage that I was putting to it. It screamed in protest as the bushings handled the rpm load without getting too hot! Then it started running rough and I pulled it back apart. Expecting to see welded brushes and commutator I was quite surprised. No pitting no burning on either of the brushes or commutator. The roughness was from one of the wires breaking close to where it was connected to the commutator. I will rewind this with the original wind and continue with the other rewinds this week.

Cheers

Garry

Agree 100%, it must be tested out to see "if, or not" going to work.

Sorry I have not had the time to respond your PM, been busy, but it is very interesting, and I would answer as soon as I can.


Kind Regards


Ufopolitics

[sampojo]

Re: Prochiro post 7299 winding multifilar rotors

Sam


I see that you are still having problems in getting the winding to fit and calculating wire size that will fit and get the correct ohms. Earlier on in this thread, I showed how to calculate for wire but do not have the time to find it so I will give you a brief list of things to do before you start to wind.

1. Calculate the exact sq. inch or mm you have to wind in the channel. To get this correct you may have to make a drawing and divide it into several triangles and rectangles. A caliper is what to use for measuring, not a ruler.
   
   Decide what ohm value you are going to end up with. Remember that if using multiple strand that you will need a special calculator to get close to the correct ohms, as it changes non lineally by the number of wires twisted.
   
   I believe you mean this formula: 1/R=1/R1+1/R2+...+1/Rn by nonlinear, if so no need to reply...
   
   

1. Calculate the Sq. inch or mm of a wire you may use by using the diameter of the wire as the height and width.
   
   Calculate the number of wires that will fit thru each slot. (divide Sq. inch of groove by Sq. inch of the wire.)
   
   Calculate using these things, that when fully wound, if you will end up with the correct number of winds and correct ohms.
   
   
   If not, change wire size or winds and if using multiple wire numbers of wires in each multi wire.

It is not easy but will get you the motor you want first time and will fit. Also keep in mind that lentz wire will not carry as much amps as larger wire.


Prochiro

Yes I was assuming a hard triangular formation for a trifilar wire, but your way of doing it as a single strand calculation is quite proper as I see the strands spread out and lay flat as I wind. I always based it on ratios of areas starting with the number of winds that came off the old winding (if it did not fill the cavity I made an eyeball adjustment as far as percent filled, too). That has worked OK but assigning a hard geometric shape to a multifilar and computing its area is not right.