Go to Otherpower.com Home Page Go to Forcefield Shopping Cart Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page
Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Rants & Opinion - Diaries - Our Products
More magnets on rotor | 10 comments (10 topical, editorial)
Re: More magnets on rotor (3.00 / 0) (#3)
by jzeveney on Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 at 02:42:17 PM MST
(User Info)

Anyone mind if I as a really silly question?
I hope not.  In 30 words or less why the ratio of 4:3 (4 poles for every 3 coils), for 3 phase?
Just curious.  I've been searching but have not found the answer. I'm sure it's here in a post somewhere and I applogies in advanced if this question has been anwsered a 1000 times.

Thanks,
Z

[ Parent ]



Re: More magnets on rotor (3.00 / 0) (#5)
by Ungrounded Lightning Rod on Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 at 08:12:09 PM MST
(User Info)

Don't know about 30 words or less.

The four poles (two north, two south), produce two "cycles" of the magnetic field when they move forward by that four-pole spacing.  Think of these "cycles" as 360 degrees each, for a total of 720 degrees.

Consider two coils at different positions along that path.  The phase angle between their output is equal to the fraction of that four-pole spacing that they are displaced from each other.

With three coils you equally divide the cycle.  First one is arbitrarily called zero degrees.  Next one is 2/3 of a cycle (240 degrees) delayed.  One after that is 4/3 (= 1/3, because whole cycles don't count) of a cycle (480 - 360 = 120 degrees) delayed.  Three phases, equally spread around the "circle", at zero, 120, and 240 degrees.

After the four poles and three coils the phase relationships repeat.

= = = =

It would be easier to see if you doubled up the number of coils, arranging the extras so that their sides "paved" the empty spaces in the middle of the first set.  Then it would be three coils for each two poles, and as you went forward they'd be at 0, 1/3 and 2/3 cycle (0, 120, and 240 degrees) before things start to repeat.

But paving the whole area means one of two things:

 - You have to open the gap to make room for the second layer of coils, lowering the field and still leaving half the space unoccupied by copper (though this time it's half the space vertically.

 - You can't use flat coils but have to "bend" the portion outside the magnet path (or wind the coils in a warped 3-d configuration) to keep the thickness between the magnet poles the same.

Winding warped coils is a real pain, and then you have to cast a stator with a groove under the magnet path and a fatter part where the outside-the-magnet-path portion of the coils sits.  Running the magnets in a groove like that inhibits cooling, too.

Weakening the field by opening the gap means you end up with less voltage per coil but the same resistance, which means a higher percentage of losses.  And that's forever.

Only putting in half the coils effectively means doubling the number of magnets for a given number of coils compared to a "paved" design and letting the magnets only work half the time.  But extra magnets are just a one-time expense.

So the N times (four pole, three coil) three-phase design is usually used, because it's so easy to construct an efficient alternator.

= = = =

Make sense now?

[ Parent ]



Re: More magnets on rotor (3.00 / 0) (#6)
by Ungrounded Lightning Rod on Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 at 08:14:38 PM MST
(User Info)

The phase angle between their output is equal to the fraction of that four-pole spacing that they are displaced from each other.

Make that:

The phase angle between their output is equal to the fraction of that four-pole spacing that they are displaced from each other times 720 degrees (two cycles).


[ Parent ]



Re: More magnets on rotor (3.00 / 0) (#9)
by jzeveney on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 07:11:02 AM MST
(User Info)

Yes thank you very much!!!

[ Parent ]


Re: More magnets on rotor (3.00 / 0) (#10)
by Jeff (ruralmcguyver at yahoo dot com) on Sat Aug 16th, 2008 at 02:44:58 PM MST
(User Info)

I'm getting started on a similar project, and would LOVE your input!

@ your statement: " - You can't use flat coils but have to "bend" the portion outside the magnet path (or wind the coils in a warped 3-d configuration) to keep the thickness between the magnet poles the same.

Winding warped coils is a real pain, and then you have to cast a stator with a groove under the magnet path and a fatter part where the outside-the-magnet-path portion of the coils sits.  Running the magnets in a groove like that inhibits cooling, too."

Assume winding the coils in a radial "3-D" form won't be a problem (I have a wood form already started, just need to trim it to size depending on my choice of mags).

After weeks of reading, creating pages & pages of WORD docs, and doing AutoCad drawings, I'm still unsure of my choice in magnets. Due to an extremely limited budget, I may have to add the inner rotor at a later date.
Also, cooling shouldn't be a problem, as I'll be punching 1x1 "fins" all around the top of the rotor "pan" for that.

I made only 2 drawings, one with 1x2x1/2 mags, and the other with 1inch dia. x 3/8 mags. I can buy ALL the 1inch dia. ones for inner & outer rotors, but the rectangular ones will have to be the outer rotor only at first. The config for the rectangular ones I hope is correct for 3-phase. The config for the disk mags is the simpler single phase (I think). I found a calculator for the flux density for each config, and surprisingly the round mags are higher! 3325 for the disk mags, and 3283 for the rectangular.

Your input is greatly appreciated. If the rectangular mags still end up at the top of my list, will it be worth a !!#$^ with only the outer rotor?

Also, there is a definite possibility this WILL NOT be powered by a hawt-vawt. I also only need 5amps at 200-300rpm (this is almost 20inches dia.)

Thanks again for any advice/input.




Rectangular Mag Config.




Round Mag Config.
Rural McG
[ Parent ]



Re: More magnets on rotor (3.00 / 0) (#8)
by jzeveney on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 05:16:20 AM MST
(User Info)

Thank you very much for the clear explanation!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4:3 it is.

[ Parent ]



More magnets on rotor | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 editorial)

Menu
· create account
· How to use the board
· FAQs
· search the board
· Google search the board
· Old Otherpower Board

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Powered by Scoop
You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest © 2003 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!