Fieldlines.com: The Otherpower discussion board
Formulas and calculators => Coil winding => Topic started by: brandnewb on December 30, 2023, 12:13:37 PM
-
As I am working on some test coils and test magnet holders. I thought it important to also be able to test for limits
I plan to test a variety of configurations.
The idea is to have a pure epoxy resin cast coil as a base line. And several other variations to see what the effects of those additives are.
And have several variations of magnet configurations spin over them while the coils are shorted.
Would it be ok for me to drive my alternator test bench with a 20KW AC variable speed motor? if at all affordable and required.
I can supply a continues power of 11 KW. spread over 3 phases. I am assuming this will enable me to supply the power needed to start seeking the limits of a coil magnet configuration. In case that is not enough I can temporary bypass the my circuit breakers in the part of the electrical breaker cabinet that is my responsibility and for short bursts supply a bit below 19.83 KW before the main breakers ( that are not part of my electrical breaker cabinet) trip.
I am hoping that this will enable enough power to start seeking limits.
I am asking for someone to tell me that this is a good way or how to do it even better.
Or I am kind of hoping I do not need to go that large to begin with. I mean if I can also reach conclusions that people would trust with much less power then I am all for that!
-
The reason to do the test as I suggested is because it doesn't require you to measure the torque on the coil by the magnets. The torque is constant, by gravity. measuring rpm is easy, measuring torque isn't, especially if the torque is fluctuating due to the torque not being constant, because the rectifier either doesn't draw constant power, or its a single phase test coil.
you can do the tests with a single test coil, and the results will correlate well to 3 test coils connected in delta. but they won't when connected in Y. the reason being the third harmonic is canceled out and "missing".
so for example on my 3 phase generator, the phase to neutral voltage was 138 or maybe 142, but the phase to phase was 230. 10-16 volts went missing. however, it did produce a very nice sine wave.
basically all you need is a test coil, a scale to weigh it, then wind up the string around the generator shaft, short the coil, and measure the peak rpm of the rotor. then compare with thinner coils and closer magnet spacing, or wider coils, etc.. or coils with bigger or smaller ID or also the OD.
-
ok brother.
I will first do as you suggest then!.
Thank you.
It will be soo much less hassle than getting out the big guns.
-
Can you please elaborate a bit on what is OD and ID.
And what is it I am testing for again?
In my previous thread you mentioned we are looking for the sweet spot for how much mechanical resistance the coils can provide to the magnets to produce amperage or something to that extend.
Is this still related?
-
ID= Inside dimension
OD= Outside dimension
When winding coils (even if it's only for a joule thief, though for a joule thief it's usually just a couple turns) I use the metric system, along with calipers with a digital readout.
Cheers
Bruce S
-
sorry guys. I think I am just losing sight of what one meant.
Why not I get out the big guns and starting blowing up some coils ;) ?
Nah but seriously. I am not sure what good it would do if I would weigh my coils.
For one thing I started with a spreadsheet for one of the 0.4mm diam wired coils at 300 winds / 600 turns. it weighs 92 grams.
I already found the material I need to setup the experiment like described but I am not really sure what it is we can learn here. I am sure there is a lot but I am just not sure.
Can I please have some more context?
-
;D
-
Temperature plays a role. You may hit temperature issues before maximum watts or volts.
-
Can you please elaborate a bit on what is OD and ID.
And what is it I am testing for again?
In my previous thread you mentioned we are looking for the sweet spot for how much mechanical resistance the coils can provide to the magnets to produce amperage or something to that extend.
Is this still related?
The point is to find the optimal inner and outer diameter and thickness of a coil that provides the most resistance.
The problem is, the magnet's radius is also a variable. You cant have the magnets too far apart, because when you connect all the coils together, the current is flowing through other coils which are not producing voltage.. so ideally you need 3 test coils, connected in Y, but shorted. Or perhaps better, rectify the test coils and short the rectifier.
So you want to keep your magnet and coil ratio, and magnet spacing (both are variables you can change) such that you ether get a clean sine wave, or a trapezoid, but if your magnets are too far apart, you get a sine wave ish pulse, followed by dead space, then a pulse of the opposite polarity, and this will be worse.. unless you rectify every coil separately.
-
understood sir!
Yet I am 99.999% certain I can generate a clean sine wave or a clean trapezoid. Early tests with oscliscopes suggest I can do at least the sine wave. Going for trapezoid would mean going stacking sideways like Mary suggested or some other exotic configuration one can think of. I like sine waves though ;)
So the goal is to have weight on a tether pulling the test bench and measure the time it takes for it to reach the ground? the longer it takes the better it is?
Or is the point to have the weight on the tether pull a configuration along and see what generates the highest amperage? Is that even possible with shorted coils? I guess so as what is the difference with a load like a resistor?
Where does the weight of the coil come into play again?
-
Yet I am 99.999% certain I can generate a clean sine wave or a clean trapezoid. Early tests with oscliscopes suggest I can do at least the sine wave. Going for trapezoid would mean going stacking sideways like Mary suggested or some other exotic configuration one can think of. I like sine waves though ;)
" A circuit generates three-phase sine waves with excellent amplitude and phase symmetry. A variable-frequency, three-phase, sine-wave generator circuit has been designed for use as a source of polyphase excitation in studies of the propagation of traveling waves in plasmas.Mar 27, 2020
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphase_system
3 phase poly wave sine wave.
-
https://www.fieldlines.com/index.php?topic=146386.0
-
Ok Sir,
Please see if I am following your lead well enough of that I need to make changes.
I have the gravity torque setup ready now. I think.
[attach=1]
And this time I will test the failed 6 coil stacked 3 phase arrangement.
It failed because the coils moved during the curing so now there is no longer a perfect 1.25 degree of separation between each phase.
Also this test is too thick and too heavy and also just not homogeneous enough.
Nah I will do it much better next try.
{1}Also a single coil of 300 winds at 0.4mm is 92 grams net. So excluding any resin around it.{1}
[attach=2]
Can you please elaborate a bit on what is OD and ID.
And what is it I am testing for again?
In my previous thread you mentioned we are looking for the sweet spot for how much mechanical resistance the coils can provide to the magnets to produce amperage or something to that extend.
Is this still related?
The point is to find the optimal inner and outer diameter and thickness of a coil that provides the most resistance.
The problem is, the magnet's radius is also a variable. You cant have the magnets too far apart, because when you connect all the coils together, the current is flowing through other coils which are not producing voltage.. so ideally you need 3 test coils, connected in Y, but shorted. Or perhaps better, rectify the test coils and short the rectifier.
So you want to keep your magnet and coil ratio, and magnet spacing (both are variables you can change) such that you ether get a clean sine wave, or a trapezoid, but if your magnets are too far apart, you get a sine wave ish pulse, followed by dead space, then a pulse of the opposite polarity, and this will be worse.. unless you rectify every coil separately.
-
it is confirmed. having this many wires so close together in a coil set negates the whole thermal dissipation ability.
Now I am only able to have the heat stabilized at 70C when running 9 VAC at 2.6 amps through all 6 coils wired in parallel.
I will be trying again this time with half the amount of wires.
{1}I was referring to earlier tests like this on single coils. One traditional and one with iron powder. The iron powder one showed promise in both heat dissipation ability and voltage generation ability. It is outlined in my diary about the VAWT backyard experiments.{1}
-
I could not resist testing this failed coils anyway for voltage.
Now I am not really experienced with an oscope so if someone can help figure out what is says here.
I am interested in the frequency which should be really low and the voltage.
please also note that the magnets holder disk parts were spaced apart far more than the intended 28mm due to the thickness of the failed coils casting.
[attach=1]
[attach=2]
Ch1 is coil4 in isolation
Ch2 is coil2 and 5 in series.
Ch3 is coil3 in isolation.
Also the coil 1 shorted out. Could that have happened during the heating test? and if that is the case that would basically mean the end of iron filled resin coils.
I will make sure to properly cure the next stacked coil casting try and when fully cured give the coil an AC beating for like 24 hours and see if coils start failing.
-
What volts per division did you have the scope set at? 500mv(.5v)? just count the number of divisions top to bottom to get your peak AC voltage...
-
yes 500mv. but mostly it is the frequency I have difficulties with distilling out of what I see on the screen. I try to rotate the magnets over the coils at a speed that resembles around 3.8 HZ. that is the target frequency
-
yes 500mv. but mostly it is the frequency I have difficulties with distilling out of what I see on the screen. I try to rotate the magnets over the coils at a speed that resembles around 3.8 HZ. that is the target frequency
Your peak AC voltage doesn't care about frequency, rectified DC will somewhat with lower frequencies = lower rectified DC... typical bridge rectifier is AC voltage multiplied by 1.4 for a full wave bridge rectifier(electrolytic capacitor filter), there are also voltage doublers that can increase voltage but cut current in half... that is 2.8 x AC volts
-
I understand Mary,
But I was not yet thus far as to deal with rectification.
I am interested to learn how to deal with an oscope as the manual is not getting me there. I have tried please believe that.
The context I am still in is a direct drive. This means that the magnets reverse field at a given Hz at a given wind speed. in this context there is no gear mechanism to change that. Other than doubling the magnets to double the frequency of field reversal.
So in order for me to be able to reach a target voltage at a given wind speed (direct drive PMA) I need to be able to read the frequency of field reversals of the waveform.
Can you help figure that out based on what I showed?
If not that I can respect that as it might be that the interface in not adhering to standards so I will try going the costumer support route if that is any good.
-
https://www.dummies.com/article/technology/electronics/general-electronics/measure-electronic-waves-how-to-use-an-oscilloscope-180231/
Flat line on your scope is zero volts, peaks below it are negative, above it positive. Time per division is frequency and info on that along with the math is here https://sparks-activities.concord.org/sparks-content/tutorials/tutorial-25.html
With multiple coils you are going to be well above 60hz so the rectifier formula I gave will be close enough. So you are showing approx 3.5 volts peak to peak with your scope set at 500mv per division(how AC is measured). Rectified that would be 4.9 volts from just 1 coil... now add in all the other coils... say you have 6 coils per phase, or 3.5 volts x 6 = 21volts AC and rectified/filtered 29.4 volts. Enough to charge a 24 volt battery bank!
-
for your application you should use an analog 12vdc meter. The Oscope is giving to much information.
Look for analog voltmeter (with a needle)
-
Wicked
[attach=1]
winding narrow is awesome!
I can compress these 300 winds coils within 15mm thickness.
And all read around 9.6 ohms.
Now if only I can bring the heat dissipation ability back then things will be insane by what I have seen yet in my life ;)!
-
BTW, most, if not all, modern smartphones come with a magnetic field sensor these days. probably a hall effect type of thing like on an actual probe.
Now this works rather nice and accurate other than of course there is no probe you can stick into nooks and crannies.
I tried
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appdevgenie.magnetometer
and was rather impressed.
No need for any permissions other than this 1 sensor and also no tracking and/or other spyware detected by the exodus scan.
-
I have it on high authority that these waveforms somewhere fall around the 6hz mark.
And I fully trust this guy's ability to quick scan my photo and sling out an approximate number.
Now as I am getting more able to also try my self I get around the 5Hz mark using
https://www.unitjuggler.com/convert-frequency-from-ms(p)-to-Hz.html?val=200
Now whether it is 5 or 6 Hz really does not matter at this moment in time.
All that matters is that I spun the magnets too fast!!
But now at least I can start aiming much better.
60Hz is what one would get from a mains in the states. Over here it would be 50 Hz.
This is also why I am reluctant to abandon iron powder coils just yet. I mean at around 6 Hz there should not be enough energy for the 150 um iron particles to cause damage to the enamel of the copper wires when fully encased in a properly post cured casting.
Well that is my hope at least.
Lets see how things turn out in practice.
-
for your application you should use an analog 12vdc meter. The Oscope is giving to much information.
Look for analog voltmeter (with a needle)
I am worried JW that a 12 VDC meter is not going to be of use when dealing with around 52 VAC at around 3.8Hz.
Or if/when I decide to go full force. Then with ease more than 200 VAC at around 3.8Hz. I also think this oscope is not designed to deal with those rather high numbers
-
You need to use the 12volt because it will give you the best response time, you can always ad a resister in series on one side of the circuit.
Yes the Oscope measures time into the equation. However many things have to have a "feel". Regardless what you do, to not use an inverter? power in watts is what counts. Some of the things you describe don't account for ohms law while considering power in watts.
-
virtually every system we describe here uses a battery bank since the power from the mill is variable. It doesn't have the power continuous. IE it takes time to recharge the battery bank with the windmill.
https://www.electrical4u.com/half-wave-rectifiers
https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html
-
for your application you should use an analog 12vdc meter. The Oscope is giving to much information.
Look for analog voltmeter (with a needle)
I am worried JW that a 12 VDC meter is not going to be of use when dealing with around 52 VAC at around 3.8Hz.
Or if/when I decide to go full force. Then with ease more than 200 VAC at around 3.8Hz. I also think this oscope is not designed to deal with those rather high numbers
What JW is getting at is an analog meter scale is easier to read... any old analog voltmeter will do a couple hundred volts on the top scale, and as little as a volt on the bottom scale... I learned on a Simpson 260!
-
I am reading this over and over again yet still am a little worried that my current gravity torque setup is not as intended.
For example; the weight I put on the string. Should it be similar to the coil weight?
Now although I did not measure the weight of the new coils yet we can deduce it based on that an 11 ohms coil is 92 grams. The new coils are 9.6 ohms.
But lets avoid math for now ;) I will measure the actual weight later on.
And I think I should be testing not a single coil but at least 6 of them 3 phase wired in series yes?
The reason to do the test as I suggested is because it doesn't require you to measure the torque on the coil by the magnets. The torque is constant, by gravity. measuring rpm is easy, measuring torque isn't, especially if the torque is fluctuating due to the torque not being constant, because the rectifier either doesn't draw constant power, or its a single phase test coil.
you can do the tests with a single test coil, and the results will correlate well to 3 test coils connected in delta. but they won't when connected in Y. the reason being the third harmonic is canceled out and "missing".
so for example on my 3 phase generator, the phase to neutral voltage was 138 or maybe 142, but the phase to phase was 230. 10-16 volts went missing. however, it did produce a very nice sine wave.
basically all you need is a test coil, a scale to weigh it, then wind up the string around the generator shaft, short the coil, and measure the peak rpm of the rotor. then compare with thinner coils and closer magnet spacing, or wider coils, etc.. or coils with bigger or smaller ID or also the OD.
-
84 grams the new coils weigh
-
And I think I should be testing not a single coil but at least 6 of them 3 phase wired in series yes?
No there is star and delta for 3 phase
-
And I think I should be testing not a single coil but at least 6 of them 3 phase wired in series yes?
No there is star and delta for 3 phase
understood sir. Thank you.
I will also play around with star and delta.
-
with delta there is more power, with star the impedance is higher but at the nexus point of star is a neutral (4th wire) not possible with delta.
-
I remember discussing this with user- Flux years ago before he died of cancer. search for Flux's posts.
-
BTW Mary,
even though cogging will always be there to the extend of physics.
I have managed to make it unnoticeable in terms of additional vibration and/or reduced rotation of magnets.
Whether testing open or closed circuit.
So my hypotheses of reducing space between coils will help negate the issues with cogging hold up to scrutiny thus far.
Now here I start my little panic attack again :(
Why can't I get the magnets/coil arrangement to show some kind of breaking force when in a closed circuit loop?
Should I short all the coils in parallel or each coil shorted separately?
-
There is a thing called "fade" and its relative to speed, how do you deal with this" bigger magnets. However using more weak" magnets is not the answer.
For god stakes man do your experiment's with like a neo 1/2in thick. Although you cant thread tap them but you can egg shape them if they are ground that way.
Most of us here expect losses. you don't think that way :D
-
ok I understand now.
all these field readings I have been doing amount to nothing impressive.
I almost got my self there fooled for a little while as I thought that I could display some rather intimidating results.
But ok, I stand corrected.
Now please define a "better bigger stronger" magnet. other than dimensions how was it determined to be better. And I would love to see those magnets in practise.Would indeed be cool.
Now if it turns out to not be easy to show something DIY that is more powerful then what I am trying to do then I can fully understand that.
I just am hoping for something to look up to for inspiration,
-
treat NIO magnets with respect when you have them. Often when they send them to you, each magnet has a corrugated type cardboard around it. Then shielding' them for shipment.
Do a fieldlines search using hard drive magnets.
yes its weaker power but they do work, at least 15 people have made prototypes with just the magnets from hard-drives
-
This is why the database is so important.
https://www.fieldlines.com/index.php?topic=138725.0
-
understood sir!!
I will admit that I might have not taken a good enough look but the link you gave, although interesting, seems no where near as frightening as what I want to end up with.
But again, I am still rather novice so perhaps I just was not able to see the finer details.
Anyway JW, lets be cool ok? I hope that once I am done I have earned your appreciation.
maximum respect.
-
Now even though I am scared I am running into a dead end because I can't seem to be able to demonstrate drag or braking ability.
This does not deter me from plowing through trying other setups.
Now we are at an inner radius of 300mm rather than 600mm.
And the repelling magnet configuration is back as I fear that when placing these magnets traditionally then most of the field will be diverted between adjacent magnets rather than through the coils.
Now my hypothesis is that this can never happen in a repelling setup.
Even so at around what I had hoped to be 2.5Hz things are not looking to bleek.
[attach=1]
[attach=2]
-
what I do not yet understand though is that I do not see this sudden dip to 0 that I was expecting in between opposing fields.
I am guessing that the electrons in the copper wires are able to also pick up on fields that are not ideally perpendicular.
-
I do not mean to bump this thread.
But just to be sure I am asking for advice.
Now if I am unable to somehow measure/demonstrate a breaking force of the PMA then that means there is no chance that it will produce any actual wattage while in operation?
I am rather unsure on how to proceed at the moment. So I am going back to repelling but this time with 192 magnets on a single disk and see if super narrow coils on both side of the magnet disk can provide a breaking force.
-
what I do not yet understand though is that I do not see this sudden dip to 0 that I was expecting in between opposing fields.
I am guessing that the electrons in the copper wires are able to also pick up on fields that are not ideally perpendicular.
AC crosses the zero line every cycle, as your magnet polarity changes over each coil
-
Yes indeed Mary,
But given there, based on my current understanding of the theory, is no field between opposing/repelling fields.
I was just surprised to not see this tiny void. I will try increasing the sample rate. Perhaps now it is set too low.
-
Yes indeed Mary,
But given there, based on my current understanding of the theory, is no field between opposing/repelling fields.
I was just surprised to not see this tiny void. I will try increasing the sample rate. Perhaps now it is set too low.
You will not see a square wave, it will be a distorted sine wave. How distorted is dependent coils and magnets... I can think of one turbine on here that produced a good sine wave... yours is not bad at all for waveform... you may see a flat line between waves in some machines depending on build and speed of the rotor, slower you go the more of a chance of that. As a magnetic field reverses polarity a coil gives off reverse EMF, that is cogging and affects waveform. Worst case cancels some of the sine wave and results in no wave aka 0 volts and a flat line on the scope.
Make sure you set coupling to AC, in case there is any DC component there from a bad solder joint(can act as a rectifier... I have a story about that but not for here!) etc...
-
His distortion comes from that little bit of twist in the coil. It will smooth out a bit as you complete your ring stator.
-
This why I mentioned the Oscope is not a good thing to start with at the armature level. Look at these waveforms from my link. HA HA, we got techadmin with RMS voltage way back.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ac+waveform&oq=AC+waveform&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBwgAEAAYgAQyBwgAEAAYgAQyBwgBEAAYgAQyBwgCEAAYgAQyBwgDEAAYgAQyBwgEEAAYgAQyBwgFEAAYgAQyBwgGEAAYgAQyBwgHEAAYgAQyBwgIEAAYgAQyBwgJEAAYgATSAQoxMTc2M2owajE1qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
edit sp ck [spelling check/correct there can also grammar]
-
the thing is your thinking stator and not armature (if you will) nothing you have described shows complete to a magnetic circuit.,
-
finally I think I figured out how to create a breaking force/ why I was not able to demonstrate that yet with shorted coils.
That is probably because the coils I shorted thus far while testing for that do not generate any magnetic field in the x axis where we need it.
The y axis I did not test but the z axis did have a field where we do not really need a field as it will lead more to bumping magnets than breaking magnets.
Now if only I could change the Hz going through my variac from 50 Hz to what ever it is I am aiming for. It might also turn out that low Hz PMA's are not really well suited for generating opposing/attracting fields to the magnets.
If one knows of a device that can change 50Hz AC to any Hz AC then that would be great.. Or from a CVCC (DC) to variable Hz and Volt (AC) could also work.
-
finally I think I figured out how to create a breaking force/ why I was not able to demonstrate that yet with shorted coils.
That is probably because the coils I shorted thus far while testing for that do not generate any magnetic field in the x axis where we need
This is called cogging
Now if only I could change the Hz going through my variac from 50 Hz to what ever it is I am aiming for. It might also turn out that low Hz PMA's are not really well suited for generating opposing/attracting fields to the magnets.
The diode bridge cares nothing about this.
"Are you planning not to use a rectifier bridge"? this the only thing im stuck
-
Now if only I could change the Hz going through my variac from 50 Hz
A variac is a transformer device just using that in your circuit makes AC. Look around at the schematics for an invertor. Recently they have gotten away for this.
I am a TIG welder. in recent times these use solid-state instead of transformers.
https://weldguru.com/inverter-vs-transformer-welders/
-
Quote from link
Additionally, inverter welders can enhance the arc quality and provide valuable functions that were impossible with the old transformer welders.
just read the whole thing especially the inverter part
https://weldguru.com/inverter-vs-transformer-welders
Inverter Welders
Inverter-based welders use modern technology to improve efficiency and reduce the machine’s weight drastically.
Additionally, inverter welders can enhance the arc quality and provide valuable functions that were impossible with the old transformer welders.
-
If one knows of a device that can change 50Hz AC to any Hz AC then that would be great.. Or from a CVCC (DC) to variable Hz and Volt (AC) could also work.
grrrrr
-
The induction motor can be functioned as a generator when the rotational speed of the rotor is made larger than the speed of the rotary field. In this regard, this study aims to modify the remains of 3-phase induction motor to be a permanent generator.
Yes, a three phase motor CAN be spun to operate as a generator, however, an induction motor used as such will still require a supply voltage, will Have to be spun faster than its normal operating speed and cannot provide reactive power, so would need a capacitor [bank].
will somebody please tell this guy yes you can over drive/generate using sprockets and chains. I don't know where he is going get the torque for this, the only way possible is with a diesel engine. Its all ready doing this, you need output toque from someplace like Niagara Falls hydro-drive
-
I realize JW that I am a little struggling to confidently continue.
Anyway I plan on a Variable Frequency Drive in between the mains outlet and the variac to do a couple of things.
Measure which coil shape will result in the strongest x axis field.
Measure the heat dissipation characteristics at the intended frequency and voltage of a coil and in overload situations.
I will keep one posted of the results. And how I measure the actual breaking force at a know torque I still would realy like to know. I think the gravity torque setup is ready and waiting. ;)
-
I am happy to report some progress.
rather than rotating the magnets over the coils at the intended frequency I did this.
Hooked up a coil to the oscope while in measure ampere mode. I am assuming it will internally short the coil to be able to do that.
Then I held the coil and waved it over the magnets at a much higher frequency than intended.
And lo and behold! I could feel resistance. yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I would still like to avoid having to introduce a planetary gear to increase the rpm of the PMA so I will continue first testing how I can increase the magnetic field of a coil while at a certain target VDC. If I use VAC for this then my tesla probe does not sample fast enough to measure any meaningful fields.
Strangely enough my phone and magnetometer app does but it is unwieldy and just not usable in this scenario because of the lack of a probe.
I do already think that fully encasing coils in iron powder resin is counter productive for the magnetic field (which might be higher sure than if without iron powder resin) to ever reach the magnets. But it could also still be that with having such strong magnets close by a fully encased coil the field will basically sucked out. I will do more tests.
At the very least fully encasing with iron powder resin is a cool way of demonstrating ridiculous heat dissipation abilities of a coil ;)
So this means I will focus more on coil shapes that allow for an iron powder core and an iron powder top coating over all the coils as a whole, yet leaving the bottom of the coils exposed for the magnetic field to be not diverted away from the magnets.
Also this x axis field thought that I had turns out to be not the case. I can easily read similar fields on both the x and z axis. And grrr again I forgot to also measure the y axis ;(
-
Okay "Pulse width modulation"
-
Please all tell me if you would trust results gathered like this or that you think it is not a good way of testing / quantifying things..
It would really make things easier to proceed as I still do not know how to proceed with the gravity torque setup as I had set it up by advice of someone here yet now I did somehow there is radio silence on whats next;(.
I think I have a way of reliably determining the AC induced magnetic field in the coils caused by the magnets while they rotate over them.
I can create tiny coils wound over a pen shape that act as tiny magnetic field sensors when hooked up to an oscope.
I can then read 4 of them at the same time. The voltage, how ever tiny, should be directly proportional to the magnetic field in the coil under test.
And in return the magnetic field in a coil should be directly proportional to the breaking force it can exert over the magnets.
Does this make sense? I sure hope so.
It will also enable far greater measurement of the effects of stacked coils as I fear that magnetic fields might start canceling out each other. And of course the loss of heat dissipation ability we have already seen that I still have not dealt with in a stacked configuration.
-
Wasn't the whole point of large radius radial design for high frequency? Your frequency increases by pi as it gets bigger, so no gearing is required. You need to figure out useful rpm's under a load and work from there. You are probably aiming for 10-50 rpm's in all but the most extreme conditions. Then you are probably braking.
-
Ahh I see brother where I failed to keep one informed about my thought process!
I think that when we use frequency as a guideline then the radial factor is negated.
Only the velocity at which a magnet traverses a coil is altered by the radius it is slung about as far as I understood it.
Sure I am aiming high and strange. This does not mean however that I need to abandon my core principles. I will go share those at my diary as I think I never did.
-
at first I was aiming for a large velocity for the magnets to traverse over the coils. And enough space to cramp in a modest amount of them. Hence forth this unwieldy 1.32m diam outer diam test bench.
It is not something one cares to install so it would make the humanitarian aspect completely void if I were hellbent on pushing forward with this radius. Let alone the engineering challenges.
But I am beginning to believe that the velocity factor is not a linear component in the whole. So I will explore around a bit until I hit this hard wall of physics demanding me to go back to an oversized radius.
-
The problem is, the magnet's radius is also a variable. You cant have the magnets too far apart, because when you connect all the coils together, the current is flowing through other coils which are not producing voltage.. so ideally you need 3 test coils, connected in Y, but shorted. Or perhaps better, rectify the test coils and short the rectifier.
--------
Yess Sir, good Point!.
Yet one can also not have the magnets too close together.
Is there an actual true and time trail tested design out there that is optimized in most ways one can think off?
Yet the context remains ultra low frequency.
Of course I might be mistaken but I am beginning to think I might be able to setup multiple experiments just to see what works or not.
You see I do not do so well with intimidating formulas.
-
Well Matt,
I can think of one way why your thought was founded.
You see when we increase radius we also increase surface area to place magnets in. And if we then use said space to double the amount of magnets then the frequency is doubled amongst other factors.
Wasn't the whole point of large radius radial design for high frequency? Your frequency increases by pi as it gets bigger, so no gearing is required. You need to figure out useful rpm's under a load and work from there. You are probably aiming for 10-50 rpm's in all but the most extreme conditions. Then you are probably braking.
-
, so no gearing is required.
I brought up the sprockets and chain. that was me.
-
Please any and all. Please see if my plan of attack is sound or not.
What I meant earlier regarding the frequency staying the same but the velocity only changes might be conveyed like so.
I am working from a radia interval that is 3.75 degree between magnets. Below you can see such spacing at an 300mm inner radius of the magnets.
I would like to review with you guys a plan to determine which coil configuration (wire size and shape) in combination with which magnet configuration (traditional or repelling at various intervals of radia)
[attach=1]
But also sometimes I try out to increase the density of the magnets by 100% and then one will end up with something like this.
[attach=2]
I am not sure how to compare apples to oranges.
Please let me explain.
I would like to see how to create the maximum magnetic field possible induced by magnets rotating over them.
So here is my plan of attack:
1) create a bunch of different test coils varying from 0.4mm diam wire size to 1mm diam. and also in shape.
Do make sure that the 0.4mm wire coils are at all times 4 x more winds than the 1mm one. As one can fit only 4 times that wire in the same space of a 1mm one.
2) run various magnet configurations over all variations of the coils at the intended frequency. for single density that would be around 3.8 Hz and for double density that would be double that.
3) record what voltage each coil can produce at said frequencies,
4) hook up an Variable Frequency Drive to the variac at the intended frequency and at the voltage level it would have produced while induced by the magnets spinning.
5) now measure the magnetic field on each coil making sure to also take into account the depth and area it encompasses ( larger is better for breaking ability)
I am really hoping for some debate on this. even if only to hear "sounds like a plan"
-
Why face poles towards neighboring magnets?
Conventional righthand rules would be to face poles up and down rather than side to side. Your current arrangement depends on side lobes of the magnet that maybe at most 30% the strength of the actual pole. You are losing >40% of your magnetic influence.
-
Yes Sir,
I have indeed also scheduled traditionally oriented magnets in the coming test sessions.
But the plan of attack makes sense to you or not?
-
Why face poles towards neighboring magnets?
Ahh here we come full circle as to the why. And NO it is not because I just want to do something strange.
Nah. It all began with the fact that I bought these magnets on some kind of tradeoff between cost and power.
I bought 48 of them.
So that made me rather hellbent on this particular parameter.
I can admit if that is just silly. But I am not letting go just yet.
Anyway with these magnets being but 5mm thick I ran into issues with being able to create(3d print for me as machining is a bit out of my league yet) a holding disk strong enough to stay put.
So that is when I thought. hmm ok when I rotate them then I have more strength in terms of the holding disk as now it is 10mm rather than only 5mm.
Well that was the beginning of a whole lot of embarrassing history for me which can be found here.
But I am just plowing through. Just to make sure. I mean now I think I have gotten more understanding and means on how to actually demonstrate the effects of all of this.
And I will reiterate. Should repelling be indeed be a dead end then of course I will also share that.
Truth trumps pride after all.
And please lets not forget I indent to also test having coils on both sides of the single magnet rotor.
-
to really make uit understood that I am not taking it lightly here is an example of coil variations.
And some magnet variations.
[attach=1]
all I care about at this stage is to get a consensus regarding if my battle plan is sound or not.
-
that is to ask for an opinion or gut feeling one might have. Kind of like the poll I tried weeks ago that never went anywhere.
Please do not leave me hanging in limbo in where no one answers and then I have to go into a certain path based only on gut feeling.
I really need to be able to resist future naysayers from stating. Yeah but A. and B and blah blah blah.
Now is the time to shine!!!!!!
-
btw proper scientific conduct must at all times allow for scrutiny and counter evidence at any time.
but i guess one knows what I meant.
-
Why face poles towards neighboring magnets?
Ahh here we come full circle as to the why. And NO it is not because I just want to do something strange.
Nah. It all began with the fact that I bought these magnets on some kind of tradeoff between cost and power.
I bought 48 of them.
So that made me rather hellbent on this particular parameter.
I can admit if that is just silly. But I am not letting go just yet.
Anyway with these magnets being but 5mm thick I ran into issues with being able to create(3d print for me as machining is a bit out of my league yet) a holding disk strong enough to stay put.
So that is when I thought. hmm ok when I rotate them then I have more strength in terms of the holding disk as now it is 10mm rather than only 5mm.
Well that was the beginning of a whole lot of embarrassing history for me which can be found here.
But I am just plowing through. Just to make sure. I mean now I think I have gotten more understanding and means on how to actually demonstrate the effects of all of this.
And I will reiterate. Should repelling be indeed be a dead end then of course I will also share that.
Truth trumps pride after all.
And please lets not forget I indent to also test having coils on both sides of the single magnet rotor.
There are MANY online machine shops who can laser cut steel magnet rotors for you, with that big of a rotor I would go to 3/8"(10mm) material and even at that you may need to gusset it to prevent flexing.
-
Thx guys for the input.
Yet I feel we are diverting from the matter at hand.
Please focus solely and only on the matter at hand as outlined below;
1) create a bunch of different test coils varying from 0.4mm diam wire size to 1mm diam. and also in shape.
Do make sure that the 0.4mm wire coils are at all times 4 x more winds than the 1mm one. As one can fit only 4 times that wire in the same space of a 1mm one.
2) run various magnet configurations over all variations of the coils at the intended frequency. for single density that would be around 3.8 Hz and for double density that would be double that.
3) record what voltage each coil can produce at said frequencies,
4) hook up an Variable Frequency Drive to the variac at the intended frequency and at the voltage level it would have produced while induced by the magnets spinning.
5) now measure the magnetic field on each coil making sure to also take into account the depth and area it encompasses ( larger is better for breaking ability)
Now what I am looking for is either to hear "sounds like a plan" or "nah this is a bogus plan and I will tell you why"
-
HAAA!
could you imagine this guy working on solid-state electronics. Then PC software etc.
I'm sorry sir you bricked the Motherboard
-
Ahh yes, I do brick most things I touch.
However I am proud to share this insane threadripper I managed to build years ago and am working from at his very moment,
[attach=1]
I mean 128 x is not something to sneeze at is it?
Now JW I think you can help me become better and I kindly ask you for advice and guidance. Let us get this show on the road together ok?
-
Education isn't free. Look I built this website in a continuous process over 20 years.
You need to do some self study with the topics you are interested in. Its like you are speaking another language we cant understand you.
You gotta stop trying the most easy way, and this place isn't it. read book and understand info the so you can speak our language.
Now JW I think you can help me become better and I kindly ask you for advice and guidance. Let us get this show on the road together ok?
-
Start here-
https://www.google.com/search?q=Wind+Power+Workshop+by+Hugh+Piggott&oq=Wind+Power+Workshop+by+Hugh+Piggott&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQRRg9MgYIAhBFGDzSAQg0MTU3ajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
-
dear brother!
please refrain from sharing links with all kinds of tracking query strings attached to it.
I mean us brotherhood of programmers know better yes?
-
Ok try this one
https://www.amazon.com/Windpower-Workshop-Hugh-Piggott/dp/1898049203
-
You could always go radial rather than axial.
-
Yes sir understood.
I did buy a kindle of Mr Piggott rather early in the process though.
[attach=1]
But It must be that I am unable to search effectively as I was not able to find answers to my questions.
And believe you me I am self studying. Hard!!! I just operate a little slow and I have issues absorbing all information effectively, especially when higher math is involved. (not that I saw that in this kindle though)
And the trail and error process I am using to hopefully arrive at a great solution also is not without cost. But I will take those and hopefully end up with a rather limited bill of materials.
So I will just go on doing what it is I am doing and asking questions and sharing my progress. I hope it may benefit the world at some day in time.
Education isn't free. Look I built this website in a continuous process over 20 years.
You need to do some self study with the topics you are interested in. Its like you are speaking another language we cant understand you.
You gotta stop trying the most easy way, and this place isn't it. read book and understand info the so you can speak our language.
Now JW I think you can help me become better and I kindly ask you for advice and guidance. Let us get this show on the road together ok?
-
You can also contact him via his website.
https://scoraigwind.co.uk/contact/
While he may not answer back as quick as some might like , he does answer most emailed questions.
Bruce S
-
I can vouch he does engage if you can stay focused on the question.
-
yes of course not ;)
since it is still my believe that it is about the speed in the change of field then a sudden dip to 0 would only add to the the voltage.
We should not be trying to visualize the voltage graph in a direct relationship to the field.
Patience my young padawan. Patience. You will get there.
what I do not yet understand though is that I do not see this sudden dip to 0 that I was expecting in between opposing fields.
I am guessing that the electrons in the copper wires are able to also pick up on fields that are not ideally perpendicular.
-
Ok now my insecure nature kicks in again.
Am I adviced to just leave as this place is not it? What ever that meant.
I rather just keep on plowing through and share what I find out along the way.
If nothing else it will be a great journey,
But I think we already see it coming yes? Something wonderful!
-
By using the basics of Faraday's law you can see the inputs and then make some assumptions.
-
https://www.sfu.ca/~mbahrami/ENSC%20388/Notes/Intro%20and%20Basic%20Concepts.pdf
-
I think that when orienting magnets traditionally then it be important not too close. I think a lot of the field is not going through the coils but is diverted in between adjacent magnets.
Well that is what I will be testing next. To see if repelling without back plating (back plating in a repelling setup only hurts the field rather than benefit it)
But even so traditional with but a 15mm spacing between rotors already packs a punch. A hard one at that!
Look how crazy.
[attach=1]
[attach=2]
1.76 VAC at 3.6 Hz if I interpret the readings correctly. Now I would like to know if this is impressive or not.
{1}
So here the coils are 200 winds very narrowly wound @ 0.4mm diam wires.
They are not stacked yet spaced in such a manner to roughly end up with a 3 phase shift between them.
The reasoning (but open to debate as per usual) behind this configuration is that the heat dissipation ability can be more easily achieved than with while stacking coils.
And also regarding stacking coils, I still fear that the magnetic fields induced will suffer from interference. This phenomena one can see with waves.
But then again I first need to see that it in order to believe it ;)
{1}
{2}
Also I am worried that once the coils start behaving like electromagnets (as is the intend after all to actually produce power) then the magnets on the rotors might become persuaded to let go of the back plating :( Not at all something one looks forward to when a PMA is in operation.
{2}
-
So repelling at 3.75 degree interval on a 2 rotor setup does less than half as what traditional does in similar enough circumstances.
This is not looking good for that setup.
I will try now doubling the density. See if doubling the Hz will do something for this super narrow coils (after all they were wound that way for this specific scenario)
-
yeah no, there is just no way yet I can demonstrate repelling to be generating more voltage than traditional in this dual rotor setup.
Not even when going double density.
And yes sure I am comparing apples to oranges making things rather hard to take seriously. Even for me the one designing and running the experiments.
But it ain't over till the fat lady sings yes?
Just do not hold you breath. I certainly no longer am not. But I just need to see so I can close the pages on this matter once and for all.
-
Man your really into theory.
Most of us are into Proactive " proactive/practical application"
Carry on
-
With magnetism the force lines are always uniform.
If they are not then another influence is present.
-
Hi brandnewb,
After your many requests for help, I'll agree to help you with the design of the alternator for your Phoenix VAWT.
I have read many of the posts on the diysolarforum, where you started your journey to build the 'sickest VAWT' over 2 years ago.
From the beginning, there were some users there and on this Forum that gave you good and sound advice. It is possible that you could not grasp what they were telling you. That is probably why you chose to continue to do it your way, even without a clear understanding of some of the simplest electrical terms and without an understanding of electromagnetism. It takes time and a lot of effort to learn that stuff.
At least you have perseverance and enthusiasm, that is good and commendable, but as I told you in the IM's, it will only help you if you have goals and stay focused.
I don't know how successful I will be in getting you back on the road, but I am going to give it a shot.
You have said many times that you want to do some tests that will help this Forum. So I am going to suggest some useful tests that you can do that will be helpful to us here and will help you acquire good data for your future BIG alternator.
I will start with this statement; you cannot get useful data by doing tests with the coils and magnets that you are using now, and I'll tell you why.
The magnets that you are using are too small and they have the wrong proportions of length to width, and they are too thin. Nobody will ever seriously think about using magnets like that to build an alternator. So, any tests that you do with those magnets are not useful when it comes to building an alternator.
When you asked about stacking magnets, Adriaan wrote this:
"However, if the total magnet thickness is about the same as the total air gap thickness, you can better keep it as it is"
I think that you missed that. What Adriaan said is that the ideal air gap for your 5mm thick magnets is 5mm. The 3 overlapping coils that you have are about 30mm thick? At 30mm, the flux reaching the coil will be less than 15%. You need thicker and wider magnets.
The coils that you are using now are useless for any type of alternator. The wire is too thin and with too many turns. That makes the resistance way too high.
This equation, P = (I^2) x R is used to find the power dissipated by a resistor in watts.
Remember this, when you build an alternator and you wire all the coils, the finished alternator becomes a large resistor.
Most of the alternators that are built by some of the members here have coils with resistance of .5 ohms or less. The resistance of your coils is about 9 ohms per coil.
P = (I^2) x R
P = power in Watts
I= Current in Amps
R= Resistance in Ohms
Example:
If resistance of one coil is .5 ohms, 3 coils in series is 1.5 ohms.
Assume that the current is 15 amps and voltage is 58 volts.
Total alternator power = 870 watts
P=(15x15) x 1.5 = 337 watts dissipated as heat in the stator.
Now let’s see how much power will be dissipated with 3 of your 9 ohms coils.
P=(15x15) x 27 = 6,075 watts (HEAT) dissipated in the stator.
That will not be called an alternator. It will be a copper smelter.
The bottom line, you need to keep coil resistance at .5 ohms or less.
The only way to do that is to use less turns and use at least 1mm wire for the coils.
If you can build a good testing platform with 2 rotors similar to this, it will help a lot:
[attach=1]
It doesn’t have to be that big, 8 or 12 magnets per rotor should be OK.
You already have a Variable Frequency Drive. All you would need is a 2 HP 3-phase electric motor for turning the rotors at different speeds. Or you can use your Variac to turn a DC motor. The DC motor might be a better choice because the VFD's have a hard time running at very low RPM.
With that setup you can test different coils with different air gaps at different speeds and do other tests to get useful data that could also be of value to Forum members.
If you are interested in building the testing platform, let me know and I can help you with that.
Don't expect to get an electrical or electromagnetism education from Forums. We all learn mostly by doing and building things.
When you can sit in your warm home and look out the window and see the Phoenix spinning and making watts, then you will notice that you have learned quite a lot. And if you stay focused, that could be soon.
Ed
-
Thank you Ed,
This means the world to me!
So I have been able to figure out where that image came from or at least determine that it is also used by a Vietnamese seller of PMA kits.
https://www.blogdiengio.com/p/nhan-lam-bo-kit-may-phat-ien-500w-1kw.html
here is a translation of what is written in the context of that image
"Get generator kits for 500w, 1kw, 2kw, 3kw, 5kw
Do you want to make your own generator but don't have time or are you simply lazy? Let us help you. The machines we make are close to the capacity and suitable for where you live. Please contact Lam Nguyen"
My complaint to sellers like this and to the endless videos being shared online that they always fail to mention how it was determined to have a certain rating.
That was the origin of my question to you in the PM magnets to watts.
Let alone it says nothing about the coil shape and the reasoning behind that coil shape.
And of course I trust you and I will listen to you and will set this up I just fear the RPM need to be really high in order for the voltage produced to be of any use.
But as you stated I do lack a lot of understanding yet so let us just go at it and see where this leads us.
So step 1 would be is to eyeball the dimensions of this setup yes?
I am having difficulties guessing as I do not see a clear reference point to work from.
Step 2 would be sourcing these type of magnets. And I can I have already checked.
https://www.supermagnete.nl/blokmagneten-neodymium/blokmagneet-40mm-40mm-20mm_Q-40-40-20-N
if we opt for a 60kg holding force
or we can go a little stronger with something like this
https://www.supermagnete.nl/blokmagneten-neodymium/blokmagneet-50.8mm-50.8mm-25.4mm_Q-51-51-25-N
Now obviously the relationship between cost and power is lost but that does not matter in the pursuit of science.
-
in the meantime I have already a tentative conclusion that indeed a 1mm wire is the way forward as opposed to smaller.
What I did is have a coil of 1mm wire with 10 winds and a coil of 0.4mm wire at 40 winds.
Coil shape was narrow like in the double density tests.
When at around 8 Hz the 0.4 coil did around 160mV and the 1mm coil did around 48mV.
Then I hooked up each coil separately to the CVCC and fed in the voltage level they produced at 8Hz.
Then I measured the field strength at 10mm distance on both.
The 1mm coil had 16mT and the 0.4 coil had 8mT.
Unless I am tackling this wrong I think we have a clear winner {1}for when winding narrow.
But in the process just now of trying a coil shape that is matched to the magnets at 3.75 interval then this happened.
[attach=1]
at 3.8 Hz the 10 winds 1mm coil did around 100mV and the 40 winds 0.4 coil did around 410 mV.
at 100Mv DC the 10 winds 1mm coil produces a field of 25mT in the center at 10mm distance. the field drops sharply when moving to the coil legs.
at 410mV DC the 40 winds 0.4 coil also produced a field of 25mT in the center at 10mm distance. the field drops sharply when moving to the coil legs.
Now I think it is a matter of finding the sweet spot of how thick we can get wires. 1mm might indeed be the absolute minimum.
{/1}
{2}this website actually does tell a lot about the coil and shape. so something to hold on to and work from in terms of dimensional reference point.{/2}
{3}albeit that the coils seem to vary from picture to picture. So I am not sure which one was intended for the rotor configuration and which KW rating was attributed to it.{/3}
-
So I arrive at a diameter of around 500mm for the disks used in that example.
I am looking for 2 steel disks of that diameter with a thickness of 10mm.
I can purchase as well as the magnets. I can make it similar enough to the example and am eager to do so.
Yet before I proceed. Are we sure the design goal of low RPM will be met? If I look at one of the photos on that website you can see a clear motion blur indicating the disk is spinning far faster than I would like my disk to spin at.
-
Please warn me ahead of time if this is getting out of bounds and I should be less loud.
Yet while waiting on a consensus if this Vietnam idea can serve as a good baseline I am staying focused on the actual topic of this thread!
So I have already ordered 1.5mm wire and 2mm wire. It will be here in a few days.
We will no longer be using anything smaller than 1mm wires from now on unless new evidence is brought up that warrants scrutiny.
Also I went to the other end of the spectrum with coil winding and went with a single wire (1mm) serpentine in a double density setup.
[attach=1]
Here I find that at around the intended Hz for double density 7.6Hz this 5 coil serpentine can do a little less than 20mV.
And when that serpentine is subjected to 20mVDC then the field that can be measured between each wire at a distance of 10mm is around 4mT.
[attach=3]
I am beyond confused though to find that the last coil leg, at 10mm distance showed a 9mT reading.
-
Unless again making a huge blunder again I think I just witnessed interference being a problem.
[attach=1]
[attach=2]
So this for me means a clear sign of why not to go close with coils and even try to stack them.
well it is good to find out this early in the process.
But now the whole coging monster is just waiting to rear its ugly head again if we start spacing coils.
-
Thank you Ed,
This means the world to me!
So I have been able to figure out where that image came from or at least determine that it is also used by a Vietnamese seller of PMA kits.
https://www.blogdiengio.com/p/nhan-lam-bo-kit-may-phat-ien-500w-1kw.html
here is a translation of what is written in the context of that image
"Get generator kits for 500w, 1kw, 2kw, 3kw, 5kw
Do you want to make your own generator but don't have time or are you simply lazy? Let us help you. The machines we make are close to the capacity and suitable for where you live. Please contact Lam Nguyen"
My complaint to sellers like this and to the endless videos being shared online that they always fail to mention how it was determined to have a certain rating.
That was the origin of my question to you in the PM magnets to watts.
Let alone it says nothing about the coil shape and the reasoning behind that coil shape.
And of course I trust you and I will listen to you and will set this up I just fear the RPM need to be really high in order for the voltage produced to be of any use.
But as you stated I do lack a lot of understanding yet so let us just go at it and see where this leads us.
So step 1 would be is to eyeball the dimensions of this setup yes?
I am having difficulties guessing as I do not see a clear reference point to work from.
Step 2 would be sourcing these type of magnets. And I can I have already checked.
https://www.supermagnete.nl/blokmagneten-neodymium/blokmagneet-40mm-40mm-20mm_Q-40-40-20-N
if we opt for a 60kg holding force
or we can go a little stronger with something like this
https://www.supermagnete.nl/blokmagneten-neodymium/blokmagneet-50.8mm-50.8mm-25.4mm_Q-51-51-25-N
Now obviously the relationship between cost and power is lost but that does not matter in the pursuit of science.
That Vietnamese design is a copy of the one created by the founders of this forum, coil shape and number of turns was came by experimentally... and with a little math as Ed showed you above. Formula is out there for magnetic flux, more math than I care to do, or use one of the simulators many pointed out to you... that bypasses the hard math I hate! Bad enough I have to do math designing electronics!
-
in the meantime I have already a tentative conclusion that indeed a 1mm wire is the way forward as opposed to smaller.
What I did is have a coil of 1mm wire with 10 winds and a coil of 0.4mm wire at 40 winds.
Coil shape was narrow like in the double density tests.
When at around 8 Hz the 0.4 coil did around 160mV and the 1mm coil did around 48mV.
Then I hooked up each coil separately to the CVCC and fed in the voltage level they produced at 8Hz.
Then I measured the field strength at 10mm distance on both.
The 1mm coil had 16mT and the 0.4 coil had 8mT.
Unless I am tackling this wrong I think we have a clear winner {1}for when winding narrow.
But in the process just now of trying a coil shape that is matched to the magnets at 3.75 interval then this happened.
(Attachment Link)
at 3.8 Hz the 10 winds 1mm coil did around 100mV and the 40 winds 0.4 coil did around 410 mV.
at 100Mv DC the 10 winds 1mm coil produces a field of 25mT in the center at 10mm distance. the field drops sharply when moving to the coil legs.
at 410mV DC the 40 winds 0.4 coil also produced a field of 25mT in the center at 10mm distance. the field drops sharply when moving to the coil legs.
Now I think it is a matter of finding the sweet spot of how thick we can get wires. 1mm might indeed be the absolute minimum.
{/1}
{2}this website actually does tell a lot about the coil and shape. so something to hold on to and work from in terms of dimensional reference point.{/2}
{3}albeit that the coils seem to vary from picture to picture. So I am not sure which one was intended for the rotor configuration and which KW rating was attributed to it.{/3}
Don't worry about coil magnetism! They do not generate magnetic fields when in use!
-
:) Ok so now I am thoroughly confused.
I was still operating under the assumption that we are looking for some kind of breaking force ability. As it was stated here earlier it is the mechanical resistance the PMA needs to overcome to actually provide power.
Or should we perhaps concur on a different vantage point? Another, with a more wide consensus?
I am open to any and all as long as I can get rid of this fog of war that is obscuring vision for the grunt soldiers like my self.
I am sure that the generals up top have 20/20 vision but I am defending my mates here at the front line.
-
pfff a sigh of relieve.
I had the probe on wrong and also the wire ends weren't sanded enough to make the probe latch reliably.
[attach=1]
So false alarm thus far. Still no signs of interference.
BTW Mary, if all results are already in of this design, Ed suggested me to take a look at, then how can I be of help giving those a once over?
Is it that perhaps making use of a tesla meter can give some new insights?
Anyways may I please have the link to where this work has been done before me so I can learn and potentially see what Ed meant with how I can be of benefit?
{1}the reason why the waves are rather erratic is most likely because the wires were vibrating as they were banged at while the magnets spun over them.{/1}
-
brandnewb . . . . . . . . . . SLOW DOWN
I don’t know where you got the idea that I suggested a Vietnamese website.
That image of the rotors that I posted is from a big 4kW alternator that Dan Bartmann built years ago. It is just an image to show a setup with 2 rotors that you can build and use for testing.
The rotor setup that you build for testing should have only 8 magnets per disk.
The magnet wire should be between .9mm and 1.3mm. No smaller or bigger than that. That wire size can also be used for the big alternator for your VAWT.
The magnets that you showed on the links are the wrong proportions.
A magnet like this will work for testing and will also work for your big multipole alternator for your VAWT.
https://enesmagnets.pl/en/permanent-magnets/neodymium-sintered/block-magnets/50-x-20-x-20-n35-ndfeb-neodymium-magnet.html
If you use 8 magnets per rotor, the steel disks should be about 280mm diameter, and the thickness should be 9 or 10mm.
If you build this rotor setup, make sure that you build it in a way that you can adjust the air gap.
For now, forget about Teslas, braking force and terms like that.
Start thinking number of turns, resistance, air gap, RPM, volts and amps.
Ed
-
Philosophy of logic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_logic
-
pfff a sigh of relieve.
I had the probe on wrong and also the wire ends weren't sanded enough to make the probe latch reliably.
(Attachment Link)
So false alarm thus far. Still no signs of interference.
BTW Mary, if all results are already in of this design, Ed suggested me to take a look at, then how can I be of help giving those a once over?
Is it that perhaps making use of a tesla meter can give some new insights?
Anyways may I please have the link to where this work has been done before me so I can learn and potentially see what Ed meant with how I can be of benefit?
{1}the reason why the waves are rather erratic is most likely because the wires were vibrating as they were banged at while the magnets spun over them.{/1}
With air core coils cogging isn't an issue to worry about! Why iron core has been tried and not used.
For what you are doing get an F&P setup here http://www.randysworkshop.net/order.html and use it to play with your mechanical design, once that is perfected THEN see if you can improve on the alternator part of the equation! The F&P as is will crank out some decent voltage at low RPM, I spun one up by hand and lit a 100 watt 120 volt light bulb! 60RPM = 18 volts! https://www.fieldlines.com/index.php?topic=149388.0 Gear up your design to spin it faster and see better output! Stack 2 or even 3 assemblies if you have the torque and series it for low RPM higher voltage...
Playing with an F&P will teach you about cogging too and how much torque it takes to over come it.
-
Affirmative Sir,
I have ordered now 16 of those magnets and will now look for the disks. Are iron disks also ok? Easier and less expensive to source from here.
I will also purchase 1.3mm wire.
Thank you all guys for pitching in! I would love to have something producing power before the 3 year mark :)
Optimizations can always happen after that fact, should there be time left.
The rotor setup that you build for testing should have only 8 magnets per disk.
The magnet wire should be between .9mm and 1.3mm. No smaller or bigger than that. That wire size can also be used for the big alternator for your VAWT.
The magnets that you showed on the links are the wrong proportions.
A magnet like this will work for testing and will also work for your big multipole alternator for your VAWT.
https://enesmagnets.pl/en/permanent-magnets/neodymium-sintered/block-magnets/50-x-20-x-20-n35-ndfeb-neodymium-magnet.html
-
Yes Mam,
I just purchased one of those F&P's.
Some time ago I found this 7 phase wiring to reduce coging.
https://www.thebackshed.com/windmill/articles/coglessFP.php
At the end of the article it states special thanks to Bruce! Was that you BruceS by any chance? :)
pfff a sigh of relieve.
I had the probe on wrong and also the wire ends weren't sanded enough to make the probe latch reliably.
(Attachment Link)
So false alarm thus far. Still no signs of interference.
BTW Mary, if all results are already in of this design, Ed suggested me to take a look at, then how can I be of help giving those a once over?
Is it that perhaps making use of a tesla meter can give some new insights?
Anyways may I please have the link to where this work has been done before me so I can learn and potentially see what Ed meant with how I can be of benefit?
{1}the reason why the waves are rather erratic is most likely because the wires were vibrating as they were banged at while the magnets spun over them.{/1}
With air core coils cogging isn't an issue to worry about! Why iron core has been tried and not used.
For what you are doing get an F&P setup here http://www.randysworkshop.net/order.html and use it to play with your mechanical design, once that is perfected THEN see if you can improve on the alternator part of the equation! The F&P as is will crank out some decent voltage at low RPM, I spun one up by hand and lit a 100 watt 120 volt light bulb! 60RPM = 18 volts! https://www.fieldlines.com/index.php?topic=149388.0 Gear up your design to spin it faster and see better output! Stack 2 or even 3 assemblies if you have the torque and series it for low RPM higher voltage...
Playing with an F&P will teach you about cogging too and how much torque it takes to over come it.
-
At the end of the article it states special thanks to Bruce! Was that you BruceS by any chance? :)
NOPE! That is a much much smarter Bruce , his moniker was Bruce DownUnder.
He helped champion the rebuild and knowledge of using the F&Ps
-
I know of 11 forms of intelligence Bruce. So I think you are still the smartest Bruce I know of. In most of those categories ;)
But let us not linger on reproduction extremities measuring contests ;)
-
With air core coils cogging isn't an issue to worry about!
What is the difference of shorting the phases to shut a mill down.
-
I am also still not confident about it JW.
but my current believe, that I have not been able to demonstrate yet, is that when we use core enhanced coils then their breaking power (the magnetic field they produce at the distance the magnets are at) is greater than while using air core coils.
But now I am running the risk Ed will start losing faith in me as he told me to forget about breaking force.
I am soo torn now between worlds.
I am really so sorry Ed if my next statement will ruffle some feathers :( And this is in no way a form of disrespect., I just have not enough evidence to just give up on the breaking force concept that @joestru started yet never followed up on.
This is all parallel to the fact that I will build this example you mentioned as I already ordered most components. But in the end of the day we then end up having to compare apples to oranges again we all can not converge on some kind of method to determine how to quantify things.
Let it be heard please that the goal and focus is on a PMA that can kick ass at around 13 seconds per revolution.
Let this be my legacy then. I no longer care if I can build a wind turbine or not. All I care to leave behind is the notion that consistency matters. Let us all agree that the things stated should be repeatable and make sense for future generations yes?
-
I should NOT have said forget about Teslas and breaking force.
I should have said:
For now, concentrate on number of turns, resistance, air gap, RPM, volts and amps.
Other things like Teslas, braking force, cogging and terms like that are important, but they will become clearer to you once you have your testing setup and start doing the testing.
quote from brandnewbell:
I just have not enough evidence to just give up on the breaking force concept that @joestue started yet never followed up on."
Now listen, this is very important.
When it comes to the definitions that different people give to technical terms, there could be differences and sometimes misunderstandings.
I want you to define to the best of your ability, what do you mean by breaking force. Please do that for me so I have a better understanding of what you mean.
Ed
-
@SparWeb,
I found your 2006 document at
http://www.jimic.cl/appv/Congreso/PDF/AXIAL_FLUX_HowItWorks.pdf
It describes the Dan Bartmann Axial PMA Ed is refering to, for which I have all 16 magnets in at the moment.
But in the end you write the following
"At 80 RPM, this alternator will produce 50 Volts, unloaded. When connected to a 48V Battery
system, Dan has recorded 600 Watts at 100 RPM. (Roughly 12 Amps). This is actually a
fairly large PMA, suitable for a windmill size of about 17 feet diameter. At higher wind speeds,
the prop turns much faster and he can capture upwards of 3 kiloWatts."
This is in stark contrast to what I am aiming for. Roughly 52V open circuit at 4 RPM.
@MagnetJuice
What I meant with breaking force ability was inspired by Joestru when he mentioned mechanical resistance and MaryB when she mentioned cogging and how much force it takes to overcome it.
The current charge controller I have will short all 3 phases to slow down the turbine. But if the coil/magnet configuration can't produce enough torque/breaking force then not much breaking will happen.
On the same token, if there turbine is charging the battery bank but not much resistance in the turning is being produced then there will be very little wattage available to charge at.
-
Brandnewbie,
There is something you need to take into account. ohms law https://www.fluke.com/en-us/learn/blog/electrical/what-is-ohms-law
This will be key to your calculation's.
Also it relates to your style, you can measure the coils and plug ohms law in and you will understand things differently.
-
hahhah this newbie did find eventually a guide on how to use gravity as a torque/breaking force measuring device.
sweet.
I am going down that path!! to see if I can get anywhere with my original plan.
-
Im not sure if you understand what im saying.
One thing that you have to consider, "resistance" is a dry measurement and "impedance" is what is measured on a live circuit. Again search for an engineering text and read it (book) we may have a way to referrer you a book that will cover the basics. You need to understand common nomenclature. Look into a basic solid state book so you can cover all bases.
-
There is a difference between mechanical resistance and electrical resistance BUT the two are tied together in a wind turbine! Electrical resistance can affect cogging... which is mechanical resistance.
Hence JW's suggestion to learn ohms law, and later maybe LC circuit calculations because adding capacitors to each phase can boost the voltage but they need to be tuned to match the frequency and reactance(think of it as ohms for a coil at a certain frequency) of the stator...
Learning basic electronics will really help you a lot!
-
go on ebay and find this book. Getting started in electronics by Forrest Mims
MAKE SURE YOU GET THE GREEN BOOK
-
Yea guys, I agree that he should learn at least some basic electricity.
However, I recalled that he said a couple of times before that he has some difficulties learning from reading text.
There is still a lot that can be learned by watching videos and by personal experience.
That is one of the reasons that I recommended to him to build a small alternator.
brandnewb,
If you get the magnets and the steel plates that you ordered, hold on before you start assembling things. It has to be done in a certain order and a certain way.
Ed
-
Yea guys, I agree that he should learn at least some basic electricity.
However, I recalled that he said a couple of times before that he has some difficulties learning from reading text.
There is still a lot that can be learned by watching videos and by personal experience.
That is one of the reasons that I recommended to him to build a small alternator.
brandnewb,
If you get the magnets and the steel plates that you ordered, hold on before you start assembling things. It has to be done in a certain order and a certain way.
Ed
That is where the Forest Mims books come in handy, they do small hands on experiments to how the principals being taught... basic equipment needed, multimeter, a breadboard is handy(if it wasn't so dang expensive I could mail him one!), along with a few basic electronic parts that are easy to source, RS Electronics in EU, Digikey has EU offices, Allied has EU offices...
Ohms law is really easy to understand once yu do it hands on! And it is the most used math when dealing with designing a wind turbine.
-
the topic seemed to be headed into the right direction with early contributions of Joestru and MaryB but then got really confusing with images of alternators that clearly will not help both getting an answer to this topic and second to my overall goal of reaching a high voltage at low RPM.
And then to think all I wanted was to stay focussed on a clear goal.
I even reminded about that here in this thread.
I will report back once I have reached my goal.
Thx guys for the input.
Yet I feel we are diverting from the matter at hand.
Please focus solely and only on the matter at hand as outlined below;
1) create a bunch of different test coils varying from 0.4mm diam wire size to 1mm diam. and also in shape.
Do make sure that the 0.4mm wire coils are at all times 4 x more winds than the 1mm one. As one can fit only 4 times that wire in the same space of a 1mm one.
2) run various magnet configurations over all variations of the coils at the intended frequency. for single density that would be around 3.8 Hz and for double density that would be double that.
3) record what voltage each coil can produce at said frequencies,
4) hook up an Variable Frequency Drive to the variac at the intended frequency and at the voltage level it would have produced while induced by the magnets spinning.
5) now measure the magnetic field on each coil making sure to also take into account the depth and area it encompasses ( larger is better for breaking ability)
Now what I am looking for is either to hear "sounds like a plan" or "nah this is a bogus plan and I will tell you why"
-
QUOTE from MagnetJuice:
After your many requests for help, I'll agree to help you with the design of the alternator for your Phoenix VAWT.
QUOTE from brandnewb:
Thank you Ed,
This means the world to me!
QUOTE from MagnetJuice:
I don't know how successful I will be in getting you back on the road, but I am going to give it a shot.
I failed. :(
QUOTE from brandnewb:
Now what I am looking for is either to hear "sounds like a plan" or "nah this is a bogus plan and I will tell you why"
I told you why but somehow you missed it.
QUOTE from brandnewb:
I will report back once I have reached my goal.
I have no idea what your goal is but carry on, and the best of luck.
Ed
-
So preliminary results show that a repelling {1}double density single rotor, dual stator{/1} setup is indeed a dead end and quite frankly a bit of a foolhardy idea to begin with ;).
I can only get a few winds in a coil at best before the coil gets so tall (2 maybe 3 layers only) the field already drops to unusable values.
So finally I can close the books on that concept.
Now it is still the question "to stack coils or not to stack coils".
But I am leaning against it because although I have not yet demonstrated it I am not sure what the magnetic field in the coils will do when they are tilted diagonally slightly. I can only imagine it will not benefit the interaction between that field and the magnets.
Another, perhaps far more important reason not to stack coils. One that I have demonstrated already is that with having coils stack then heat dissipation rates drop to near zero. Ok truth be told I have not really sunk my teeth into that problem yet to see if I can fix that.
Anyway. I can generate around 1.17vAC at around 3.8Hz with a single stacked coil pair when each coil in that pair has 50 winds (I am ignoring coil{2}wire{/2} size for now).
And theoretically we can have 48 of those stacked pairs per phase making for around 56vAC at 3.8Hz. In practise I will need some empty coil slots at every stator segment else not be able to (de)install it in a modular fashion.
For traditionally spaced coils we can have 24 coils per phase. But the good thing about the coil shape in this scenario is that it can be wider. Maybe even enough more wide to compensate for the extra winds needed to be able to reach around 2.1vAC per coil at 3.8Hz.
And then of course all the added benefit mentioned earlier.
reporting back once I managed to figure out how much winds that is.
-
Here check this out don't be afraid of the link...
Maxitronix 200 in 1 Electronic Project Lab - Educational Fun Basic Electronics
https://www.ebay.com/itm/325986261679?chn=ps&_trkparms=ispr%3D1&amdata=enc%3A1w69pfJeBT_G2HVVkGUhmcw63&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=325986261679&targetid=1585159290171&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9013362&poi=&campaignid=19894961968&mkgroupid=148855406073&rlsatarget=aud-1317302328205:pla-1585159290171&abcId=9307911&merchantid=603800276&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIg6Obms26hAMVUBmtBh0skwz4EAQYBCABEgJ0A_D_BwE
Before there was Forest Mims
The projects will at least teach you how to read a schematic diagrams
-
So gang. first most please accept my humble apologies for being stubborn.
It is one of those self defense mechanisms that kick in when information gets too difficult for me to process in a, for me, suitable time frame so I just default back to where I was.
It is nothing personal nor will it ever be.
So here is my update thus far.
!!If at any time someone feels I should demonstrate because something does not make sense then please do so to signal that. Because then I will and maybe we find I blundered again.
If it all makes sense to you then I am also content to just go with this flow!!
Context: 300mm radius ID of magnets spaced at a 3.75 degree interval.
Considering non stacked (traditionally spaced with an air gap of around 20mm (4 times that of the magnet thickness) 24 coils per phase) coils even though wider of nature than stacked coils will need about 280 winds to end up in the 2.something volts sphere.
While when stacking coils (48 per phase) in this context only needs coils to be 50 winds to end up in the 1.something sphere of volts.
And I think I can explain why.
You see magnetic fields when induced by electromagnets (the coils) they do interfere with each other. But then in a good way. In where overlapping phases compound.
And here comes the kicker!! The adjacent pole in the same phase does not counteract the other. Not al all!
I just love magnetic fields soo much ;) If only I understood them ;)
Overmore the field around said coils is non biased for direction. It is a sphere so that means that my earlier worry of having tilted coils would harm the interaction with the magnets seems debunked.
But I know for sure once I start the torque tests. Now I am still in the finding out what configuration actually stands a chance of getting where I need to get.
Anyway all this has set me back on track with the original plan to go for a large diameter. a 300mm ID {1}inner radius{/1}was just to see. Now I have seen and I can tell. Nah that diameter will never work for my goals of having 52vAC at 3.7Hz (yes it is 3.7Hz not 3.8Hz like I have been mentioning earlier)
Also Ed, You know that I love you so that is why I have not send back the 16 magnets yet. I will keep them ready and waiting so that later on once I have some real life data I can setup a gear ratio to have this suggested setup spin around 20 times faster than what I am making. Just to compare results.
In case my configuration lacks behind then we have a clear indication why not to go with a direct drive for a low RPM VAWT.
I have more to say but no time to write it now.
-
So I have some time again now.
I am back again at an IR (inner radius) of 600mm because that will roughly double the velocity at which the magnets spin over the coils and roughly double the area we get for the coil wires to play in.
But to my shock I was unable to measure/demonstrate the expected effect.
You see I tried using a 25 winds coil at the original (600mm IR, 3.75 interval, traditional, dual rotor, single stator) and got crap results. Not at all what I expected.
So now I need to figure out what it is I am doing wrong. And yes I did check the proper connection to the oscope ;D
{1}I would love it if anyone would just blurp out any random thought of what can be going on here and/or how to zero in on a possible root cause.{/1}
{2}Also the most important revelation to me is that one should not be looking for a straight line in magnetic fields in between rotors. Some dispersion adjacent wise will actually help for the coil shapes I am considering.{/2}
-
Also Ed, You know that I love you so that is why I have not send back the 16 magnets yet.
That's the second time that someone told me that they love me today. Cool, that's a good way to start my weekend. :D
Hz is cycles per second. 3.7 cycles, or magnets passes over the coils in 1 second equals 222 RPM.
Is that how fast you want the turbine to spin?
I am sure that you mean 3.7 RPM and not 3.7 Hz. Right?
Ed
-
@MaryB,
I just got refunded my purchase of the F&P :(
Randy tells me that shipping is an additional 102 USD :(
I would have loved to play around with something like that. And indeed the stacking suggestion you made really is attractive to me.
Anyhow let's look forwards!
-
I am glad I made your weekend brother. Love is indeed the intend.
So I actually mean Hz in voltage waveform. Like on the oscope pictures I share from time to time.
Given there are 96 magnets on a single rotor disk that rotate fully every 12.something {1}closer to the 13 mark{/1} seconds that equates to around 4 RPM and around 3.7Hz of full voltage waveform.
I realize it is a bold goal. I think I can get there.
Now I am ok if we forget about magnets to watts. Let us focus on how to quantify things this early in the prototyping stage yes?
All I care about is to be able to say something that people will believe. And also not to just build and build only to find I missed something crucial ending up with an alternator that does next to nothing.
Also Ed, You know that I love you so that is why I have not send back the 16 magnets yet.
That's the second time that someone told me that they love me today. Cool, that's a good way to start my weekend. :D
Hz is cycles per second. 3.7 cycles, or magnets passes over the coils in 1 second equals 222 RPM.
Is that how fast you want the turbine to spin?
I am sure that you mean 3.7 RPM and not 3.7 Hz. Right?
Ed
-
@MaryB,
I just got refunded my purchase of the F&P :(
Randy tells me that shipping is an additional 102 USD :(
I would have loved to play around with something like that. And indeed the stacking suggestion you made really is attractive to me.
Anyhow let's look forwards!
I know you can find one in EU... heck go to an appliance store and ask if you can raid a bad washing machine for parts. They were widely used there before coming to the USA.
Another possible choice is an ECM motor from a heating/cooling system. Used to drive the big squirrel cage fan on forced air systems.
-
I have a washing machine currently on sale through a second hand market channel.
In case the final offer is not convincing then I will rip apart this machine. carefully though ;)
-
ugg!!
I made the mistake to just keep winding before I checked if the shape actually fits the template or not ;(
30 winds at 1mm diam. each coil times 6 of them stacked
But at least this tells me we have got an incredible amount of space left to either compress the coils more narrow or fill it up with a heat dissipation agent like this CU 150um iron powder (I think the CU means non electro conductive due to some coating the particles have gotten)
I am waiting for more steel, to serve as back plating, to arrive as my results without it seem to be subpar :(
-
I am so sorry gang and JW. I can no longer insert images "the path can not be empty is the error message"
But I assume that the back end logs all errors yes? whether client or server side.
-
were all having this issue currently. were getting ready to work it.
In the meantime we have a workaround.
ANY REMOTELY HOSTED IMAGE can be inserted in to you're post. This includes any previous images upload to the FL site. for now we can not upload.
-
Host issue, more than likely updated PHP version without telling us and broke several things (there's more which I won't explain here). @JW please go to cPanel and change PHP version to PHP 7.4, it's most likely set to 8+ as of now.
-
Yes your right it is 8+something. For some reason I cant find the cPanel link.
-
While were at it lets do those upgrades you were talking about. PM me if there is any sensitive info to this.
-
I blundered again guys :(
While stacking coils, I failed to also take into account that opposite fields cancel out. So while some coils compound it are others that cancel out.
So if a factor is indeed the interaction between the coils and the magnets then I do not dare to go stacking.
If it is only about reaching a voltage then I would rather stack coils as it is easer to get there then.
{1}and now i think it is not a problem again :(. We will see with the upcoming torque tests. might take a while though as I have to wait for the steel{/1}
-
I've been following your posts for sometime Branubie (if you spelled it like that it would be cool). you mentioned you would like to see a magnetic field. there's a way to do this its taught to all 6th graders in school.
Take your magnet set it on a wood table. put a piece of notebook paper over it (try to make it flat and level) then take some iron filings and sprinkle them on the paper. there you go, you will see the magnetic fieldlines.
JW
-
test post
-
It's Ok JW,
I actually kind of like it how you are able to give a new spin to my avatar name from time to time. It signals me that you no longer believe I am an actual newb.
But please do trust that I have no credentials what so ever in this field yet.
Yet rest assured I will have once all is said and done.
Anyway I tried uploading the stacked coils image again for context but this "the path can not be empty" error is still preventing me from doing that :(
Given I make no secret of also posting elsewhere shall I just share a link to there? But it feels rather disrespectful to divert traffic from this great community to another. So that is why I have not done that yet.
-
And thank you JW for suggesting this powder fieldlines test.
It would have been a great option if I was able to hook up the variable frequency drive (which has a 3 phase output without a neutral (so only 3 wires)) to the stacked coil array. But when I try that the VFD goes directly into error mode.
I am guessing because it senses not enough of resistances in the load and then assumes a short of some kind.
This is because it is important to be able to see the interaction between the coil induced fields in different phases. I tried getting there but my current setup will not allow for it :(
But fear not though. Torque tests can tell us if the coils work properly or not.
{1}and of course I forgot to also state that if anyone can help me figure out how to connect a VFD to the test coils then I am all ears. It would be of immense help on how to test/demostrate the aimed performance (or lack there of) of stacked coil configurations.{/1}
{2}And although playing with powder fields is great as was thought to me at kindergarten before I was born (yeah we role a little different here on the wrong side of the pond :)) I have these sheets of plastic that can show fields in 2 dimensions. visualizing in 3d just means moving the sheet up and down and making a video of it for analysis after the fact.{/2}
{3}The biggest fear I have if we can get a VFD to play nice with stacked coils is that then the volt will be 230. Whether we use powder or this field reactive plastic sheet I think that this voltage is far too high to make it possible to also make assumptions of the fields when at 52 volts.
But at least it could signal early on the the design process if fields destructively interfere or not. I no longer think they will.
{/3}
I've been following your posts for sometime Branubie (if you spelled it like that it would be cool). you mentioned you would like to see a magnetic field. there's a way to do this its taught to all 6th graders in school.
Take your magnet set it on a wood table. put a piece of notebook paper over it (try to make it flat and level) then take some iron filings and sprinkle them on the paper. there you go, you will see the magnetic fieldlines.
JW
-
It's Ok JW,
I actually kind of like it how you are able to give a new spin to my avatar name from time to time. It signals me that you no longer believe I am an actual newb.
But please do trust that I have no credentials what so ever in this field yet.
Yet rest assured I will have once all is said and done.
Anyway I tried uploading the stacked coils image again for context but this "the path can not be empty" error is still preventing me from doing that :(
Given I make no secret of also posting elsewhere shall I just share a link to there? But it feels rather disrespectful to divert traffic from this great community to another. So that is why I have not done that yet.
upload them to imjur... share the direct link... it acts as a backup if a post here gets corrupted...
-
Believe me I have tried reaching a consensus on several fora on how to quantify the abilities of a magnet/coil configuration.
And since I believe the most knowledge people in the field are here I will just keep hammering on.
@Adriaan Kragten (because of general advanced knowledge)
@Joestru (regarding the mechanical resistance and the gravity torque test)
@MaryB (regarding coging)
If you guys would just give it a try then I trust we could finally get there.
The most difficult part seems to be how to get from a measurement of time to something like watts.
Let us get this show on the road gang. You have no idea how much of an importance this is!
{1}And I realize I mentioned already having found a guide on how to do this and at first glance it did look to me like that. But then I found he left out the important bit of how to convert time to watts{/1}
-
The most difficult part seems to be how to get from a measurement of time to something like watts.
Even with my limited understanding, I would be interested into this, if you check how much pain and suffering stators have caused me: https://www.fieldlines.com/index.php/topic,150320.0.html you will easily be able to understand why.
-
I hope we perhaps can use AI to settle down on a consensus.
And I used the ChatGPT 4 model as to give this conversation the best chance of reaching somewhere plausible.
I know it is a lot of text to go through (by the AI) but please do so and tell me if you think we can build on this process or AI is messing up big time again as it likes to do most of the times.
ChatGPT 4
User
in axial permanent magnet alternators. What is it that is responsible for not the voltage but the wattage capabilities?
ChatGPT
In axial permanent magnet alternators (PMAs), the wattage capabilities, also known as the power output, are influenced by several factors, but not directly by the voltage alone. The power output of an alternator is a function of both the voltage it generates and the current it can supply. The key factors responsible for the wattage capabilities of axial PMAs include:
Magnetic Flux Density: The strength of the magnets and the design of the magnetic circuit in the alternator affect the magnetic flux density. Stronger magnets or a design that effectively concentrates the magnetic flux can increase the electrical output for a given rotor speed.
Rotor and Stator Design: The physical dimensions of the rotor and stator, including the diameter and length, directly influence the power output. A larger size can accommodate more windings or stronger magnets, leading to higher power generation.
Number of Coils and Turns: The number of coils in the stator and the number of turns in each coil affect the alternator's ability to generate electricity. More turns in the winding increase the voltage generated, and appropriately designed coils can also handle higher currents.
Material of Conductors: The type of material used for the windings affects the resistance and efficiency of the alternator. Lower resistance materials allow for more current to flow, increasing the wattage capability.
Cooling System: Effective cooling is vital for maintaining the performance of an alternator. Higher temperatures can increase resistance and reduce efficiency, limiting power output. Adequate cooling systems allow the alternator to operate at optimal conditions for longer periods.
Speed of Rotation: The rotational speed of the rotor influences the frequency and amount of electrical energy generated. Generally, higher speeds can lead to higher power output, assuming the alternator is designed to handle such speeds without excessive mechanical or electrical losses.
Efficiency of the Alternator: The overall efficiency, which is a measure of how well the alternator converts mechanical energy into electrical energy, directly impacts the wattage output. Higher efficiency means less energy is wasted as heat and more is available as electrical power.
Load Matching: The ability of the alternator to match the electrical characteristics of the load also influences effective power delivery. An alternator that is well-matched to its load can deliver more power more efficiently.
In summary, while the voltage is an important aspect of an alternator's electrical output, the wattage (power) capabilities are determined by a combination of factors related to the design and materials of the alternator, as well as the operational conditions such as cooling and rotational speed. These factors work together to determine how much electrical power the alternator can reliably produce and deliver to a load.
User
and what about mechanical (electromagnetical) resistance bwetween the coils and the magnets? Is that a factor?
ChatGPT
Yes, the mechanical (or more accurately, electromagnetic) interaction between the coils and the magnets in an axial permanent magnet alternator does indeed play a significant role in its overall performance, including its wattage capabilities. This interaction can manifest as electromagnetic resistance, often referred to in this context as "cogging" and "eddy current losses," among other effects. Here's how these factors contribute:
1. Cogging Torque
Cogging torque is a form of electromagnetic resistance that occurs due to the interaction between the permanent magnets on the rotor and the slots of the stator in an alternator. It causes a kind of magnetic sticking or reluctance to move when the rotor's magnets align with the stator's slots, leading to uneven rotational movement at low speeds. This can affect the efficiency and smoothness of the alternator's operation but doesn't directly impact the wattage capabilities under constant operation at optimal speeds. However, it can influence the startup torque and thus the mechanical energy required to initiate rotation.
2. Eddy Current Losses
Eddy currents are circular currents induced in the conductor parts of the alternator, such as the stator core, due to the changing magnetic field. These currents generate resistive losses, heating the material and reducing the overall efficiency of the alternator by converting some of the mechanical energy into heat rather than electrical energy. This effect can indeed impact the wattage output of the alternator, as more of the input mechanical energy is lost to heat and less is available for conversion to electrical energy.
3. Hysteresis Losses
Similar to eddy current losses, hysteresis losses occur in the magnetic material of the stator core due to the repeated magnetization and demagnetization of the material by the rotating magnetic field. This also converts some of the mechanical energy into heat, reducing the efficiency and thus the effective wattage output of the alternator.
Mitigation Techniques
Design Optimization: The design of the alternator can be optimized to reduce cogging torque, for instance, by carefully selecting the number of magnets and stator slots, or by using skewed slots or magnets.
Material Selection: Using materials with lower electrical conductivity for the core can reduce eddy current losses, while materials with low hysteresis loss are preferred for the magnetic core.
Lamination: The core of the stator is often laminated, meaning it is made of thin layers of magnetic material insulated from each other. This reduces the path and therefore the magnitude of eddy currents, minimizing the associated losses.
In summary, electromagnetic interactions between the coils and the magnets, manifesting as cogging torque, eddy current losses, and hysteresis losses, indeed affect the mechanical to electrical energy conversion efficiency, and thus the wattage capabilities of axial permanent magnet alternators. Through careful design and material choice, these effects can be minimized to improve performance.
User
let us focus on #1. I want to explore 2 things in succession. 1. how to quantify the cogging torque and 2. how to use that measurement to settle on a wattage potential the coil/magnet configuration has
ChatGPT
Quantifying cogging torque and using that measurement to infer the wattage potential of a coil/magnet configuration in an axial permanent magnet alternator involves a multi-step process. Let's break it down:
1. Quantifying Cogging Torque
Cogging torque is the torque due to the interaction between the permanent magnets of the rotor and the stator's slots or teeth that occurs even when no electrical load is connected. It is typically measured in Newton-meters (Nm) and varies as the rotor turns.
Methods to Quantify:
Finite Element Analysis (FEA): A common method for quantifying cogging torque is through simulation using Finite Element Analysis software. FEA allows for a detailed analysis of the magnetic field interactions and can accurately predict cogging torque over a rotation cycle.
Experimental Measurement: Cogging torque can also be measured directly using a torque sensor attached to the shaft of the alternator. The alternator is turned slowly, and the torque is recorded at various positions to capture the variation over a complete rotation.
Factors Affecting Cogging Torque:
The number of poles on the rotor and the number of slots in the stator.
The geometry of the magnets and stator slots.
The air gap between the stator and rotor.
The strength of the magnets.
2. Using Cogging Torque Measurement to Infer Wattage Potential
While cogging torque itself does not directly impact the wattage an alternator can produce under load, its measurement can provide insights into the alternator's design efficiency and potential for optimization. Lower cogging torque is generally indicative of a more refined design that may also exhibit lower losses and higher efficiency under load.
Steps to Infer Wattage Potential:
Efficiency Analysis: Start by analyzing the alternator's efficiency. Lower cogging torque can contribute to smoother rotation and potentially higher efficiency since less energy is wasted overcoming the cogging. However, actual wattage potential depends on other factors such as magnetic flux density, the coil's electrical resistance, and the alternator's speed.
Load Testing: With cogging torque minimized, conduct load testing to measure actual output under various loads. Measure voltage, current, and power factor to calculate real power output in watts.
Performance Modeling: Using the cogging torque data along with other design parameters, create a model of the alternator's performance across its operational range. This model can predict wattage output under various speeds and loads, considering the alternator's efficiency.
Considerations:
Optimization for Low Cogging: Design strategies to minimize cogging, such as adjusting the magnet-to-slot ratio, skewing slots or magnets, and optimizing the air gap, can lead to more efficient energy conversion, indirectly affecting wattage potential.
Comprehensive Design Evaluation: While cogging torque is an important aspect of design, evaluating the alternator's wattage potential requires a comprehensive review of all design aspects, including magnetic circuit design, electrical losses (like eddy currents and hysteresis losses), and thermal management.
In summary, quantifying cogging torque is a critical step in evaluating and optimizing the design of an axial permanent magnet alternator. While cogging torque itself doesn't determine wattage potential, a low cogging torque is indicative of a design that may also be optimized for higher efficiency and power output. The ultimate wattage potential is determined through a combination of design optimization, experimental measurement, and performance modeling, taking into account the entire system's operational characteristics.
User
let us use a gravity torque experiment to home in on the torque aspect.
I will first define what is a gravity torque experiment ok?
ChatGPT
Sure, go ahead and define what a gravity torque experiment is, and how you plan to use it in the context of measuring or analyzing cogging torque in an axial permanent magnet alternator. This sounds like an interesting approach!
User
so we have a coil/magnet configuration on a PMA test bench. Then I hook up a weight to be able to rotate said configuration using pullies by droping that weight from a known height.
Then I measure the time difference it takes for the weight to reach the ground coil/magnet configuration between the coils open circuit versus the coils short circuited.
Then we end up with a measurement of time yes?
ChatGPT
Yes, your description outlines an innovative approach to indirectly measure the impact of electromagnetic phenomena (such as cogging torque and induced currents) on the mechanical resistance of a permanent magnet alternator (PMA). By comparing the time it takes for a weight to drop and rotate the PMA's rotor under two conditions—coils in open circuit versus coils short-circuited—you're essentially evaluating how the electrical loading condition affects the mechanical resistance (including cogging and electromagnetic damping effects) of the system.
Here's a breakdown of what happens in each scenario:
Coils Open Circuited: With the coils open-circuited, there's no path for current to flow. Thus, the primary resistance to the rotation comes from cogging torque (due to the magnetic interaction between the stator's teeth and the rotor's magnets) and any mechanical friction in the system. The electromagnetic damping due to induced currents is minimal because these currents cannot circulate.
Coils Short Circuited: When the coils are short-circuited, any motion of the rotor relative to the stator induces currents in the coils (according to Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction). These induced currents create their own magnetic fields, which oppose the motion that generated them (Lenz's Law), adding electromagnetic damping to the system. This damping is in addition to the cogging torque and mechanical friction.
Measuring the Time Difference
Objective: The objective of measuring the time it takes for the weight to drop in both scenarios is to quantify the additional resistance (electromagnetic damping) introduced when the coils are short-circuited.
Expectation: You would expect the weight to drop more slowly when the coils are short-circuited compared to when they are open-circuited due to the additional electromagnetic damping effect.
Outcome: The difference in drop times gives an indirect measure of the electromagnetic resistance imposed by the short-circuited coils. A larger difference indicates a stronger electromagnetic damping effect, which could correlate with the alternator's electromagnetic properties like cogging torque and induced current efficiency.
Analysis
From the time measurements, you can analyze the system's behavior under load and infer aspects of the PMA's design efficiency and performance characteristics related to electromagnetic interactions. However, directly translating these time differences to specific torque values or to the alternator's wattage potential requires a more complex analysis, including understanding the mass of the weight, the height from which it is dropped, and the specifics of the pulley system used (to translate gravitational potential energy to rotational energy effectively).
This experiment provides valuable insights into the system's performance, especially highlighting the effects of electromagnetic damping and cogging torque, but it would be one component of a broader analysis to fully characterize the PMA's performance and efficiency.
User
please note that following parameter is not set in stone yet but let us consider the following;
the mass to be dropped and pull/rotate the coil/magnet configuration is 50KG. or 5KG or 10KG. that is not of real importance as long as the weight is constant between open vs shorted tests yes?
ChatGPT
Absolutely, your understanding is correct. In the gravity torque experiment you've described, the key variable you're manipulating is the electrical configuration of the coils (open circuit vs. short-circuited), while keeping the mass of the weight constant. This setup allows you to measure the difference in mechanical resistance (manifested as cogging torque and additional electromagnetic resistance when the coils are short-circuited) by observing the time it takes for the weight to drop a known distance.
By keeping the mass constant in both scenarios, you ensure that any difference in the time taken for the weight to reach the ground is due to the difference in the electrical load on the coil/magnet configuration, rather than differences in the gravitational force applied. This method effectively isolates the variable of interest (the electrical loading condition) and allows you to directly measure its impact on the system's mechanical resistance.
The steps in your experiment seem to aim at comparing the mechanical resistance faced by the rotor in two electrical states:
Open Circuit: The coils are not connected, meaning there's no path for current to flow. In this state, the system primarily experiences cogging torque due to the magnetic interactions between the permanent magnets and the stator.
Short Circuited: The ends of the coils are connected, creating a closed loop that allows for current flow when the magnet passes by. This induces a magnetic field in opposition to the magnets' movement (Lenz's Law), increasing resistance above just the cogging torque. This condition simulates the load and allows you to measure the combined effects of cogging torque and electromagnetic resistance.
The difference in time it takes for the weight to drop in these two scenarios gives you a measure of the additional resistance imposed by the electrical loading of the system. This can be a practical way to quantify the system's performance characteristics, particularly in terms of how the electrical design and configuration affect mechanical resistance.
The constant mass ensures that the gravitational force driving the rotation remains the same across tests, making the experiment's outcomes directly comparable. The weight you choose (whether it's 5 kg, 10 kg, or 50 kg) should be sufficient to overcome the static friction and any initial resistance to start the rotation but consistent across different test conditions to ensure the reliability of your results.
User
Now also please consider that the height from which the weight will be dropped also is a constant yes?
ChatGPT
Yes, keeping the height from which the weight is dropped constant is crucial for the consistency and reliability of your experiment. By ensuring that the weight always starts from the same height, you establish a controlled environment where the potential energy at the beginning of each trial is the same. The potential energy (EpEp) of the weight due to gravity is given by the formula:
Ep=mghEp=mgh
where:
mm is the mass of the weight,
gg is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s29.81m/s2 on the surface of the Earth),
hh is the height from which the weight is dropped.
If the height (hh) from which the weight is dropped remains constant, any changes in the time it takes for the weight to reach the ground can be attributed to differences in the mechanical resistance of the coil/magnet configuration under the test conditions (open circuit vs. short-circuited coils). This method isolates the variable you're testing (the impact of the coil's electrical state on the system's mechanical resistance) from other potential variables, making your experiment's findings more valid and reliable.
By maintaining both the mass of the weight and the height from which it's dropped as constants, you ensure that any observed differences in the descent time are due to the system's internal characteristics rather than external changes in the experimental setup. This approach allows you to accurately assess how the electrical configuration of the coils impacts the mechanical resistance and performance of the axial permanent magnet alternator in a quantifiable manner.
User
Now here comes the difficult part! are you ready?
ChatGPT
Absolutely! I'm ready to tackle the difficult part. What's the next step or question you have in mind?
User
So let us say that we have measured a time difference of 1 second. Then how can we somehow convert this measurement of time to something like watts?
ChatGPT
Converting the time difference observed in your gravity torque experiment into a measure of power (watts) involves several steps and requires understanding the relationship between mechanical energy, power, and time. The process will include calculating the work done by the gravitational force and the rate at which this work was done (power). Let's break down the steps based on the information provided and the assumption of a 1-second time difference between the open circuit and short-circuited coil scenarios.
Step 1: Calculate the Work Done by Gravity
First, we calculate the work done by gravity on the weight as it falls. The work (WW) done by gravity is equal to the change in potential energy, which can be calculated using the formula:
W=mghW=mgh
where:
mm is the mass of the weight (in kilograms),
gg is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s29.81m/s2),
hh is the height from which the weight is dropped (in meters).
Step 2: Calculate the Time Difference in Energy Conversion Rate
Since you've mentioned a time difference of 1 second between the open circuit and short-circuited conditions, we need to understand this in the context of energy conversion rate (power). Assuming you have the total time it takes for the weight to drop in both scenarios, you can calculate the average power involved in each case.
The power (PP) involved in converting the potential energy into kinetic energy (and overcoming mechanical resistance in the case of the short-circuited scenario) can be calculated using the formula:
P=WtP=tW
where:
WW is the work done by gravity (calculated in Step 1),
tt is the time taken for the weight to drop.
Step 3: Calculate the Difference in Power
To find the difference in power due to the electrical loading (open vs. short circuit), you would need the specific times for each scenario. However, given a time difference of 1 second, we assume one scenario takes t1t1 seconds and the other takes t1+1t1+1 seconds. You calculate the power for each scenario using the P=WtP=tW formula and then find the difference between these power values.
Step 4: Convert Time Difference to Power Difference
Given the complexity of directly translating a time difference to watts without specific times or the height from which the weight was dropped, we can approach this conceptually. The key is understanding that a longer time indicates more work done against electromagnetic resistance (in the short-circuited scenario), which corresponds to a certain rate of energy conversion (power).
For a more precise calculation, we'd need the exact height and the times for each scenario. However, the difference in power can be conceptualized as the additional power required to overcome the electromagnetic resistance in the system, which manifests as a reduction in the rate of energy conversion when the coils are short-circuited.
Would you like to proceed with some example numbers for mass, height, and specific times for each scenario to illustrate these calculations?
User
yes please
ChatGPT
Based on the example parameters provided:
The mass of the weight is 10 kg.
The height from which the weight is dropped is 5 meters.
The time taken for the weight to drop in the open circuit scenario is 3 seconds.
The time taken for the weight to drop in the short-circuited scenario is 4 seconds.
The work done by gravity on the weight as it falls 5 meters is 490.5 joules.
For the open circuit scenario, the average power involved in converting the potential energy into kinetic energy is approximately 163.5 watts. For the short-circuited scenario, the average power drops to about 122.63 watts due to the additional electromagnetic resistance.
The difference in power between the open circuit and short-circuited scenarios is approximately 40.88 watts. This difference represents the additional mechanical resistance (in terms of power) that the system had to overcome in the short-circuited scenario, which can be attributed to the electromagnetic effects of short-circuiting the coils.
This calculation illustrates how the time difference observed in your gravity torque experiment can be translated into a quantifiable difference in power, reflecting the impact of the coil/magnet configuration's electrical state on its mechanical resistance and performance.
-
I realize it feels like a fludd overflow while it is actually not!!
I am just trying to give you guys the ability to look over my shoulders on how to interact with AI.
And I think I can already tell that I can never trust what this GPT 4 model has to say about anything.
Here I tried to correlate the wattage results when given different paramters.
____
please take as parameters that the weight is 13kg and the height from which we drop it is 2.4m
with those parameters please recalculate!
ChatGPT
With the updated parameters of a 13 kg weight and a drop height of 2.4 meters, the recalculated values are as follows:
The work done by gravity on the weight as it falls 2.4 meters is approximately 306.07 joules.
For the open circuit scenario, the average power involved in converting the potential energy into kinetic energy is about 102.02 watts.
For the short-circuited scenario, the average power drops to approximately 76.52 watts due to the additional electromagnetic resistance.
The difference in power between the open circuit and short-circuited scenarios is approximately 25.51 watts.
This difference represents the additional mechanical resistance (in terms of power) that the system had to overcome in the short-circuited scenario, which can be attributed to the electromagnetic effects of short-circuiting the coils.
User
now is there a difference in watss between our earlier calculation basis and the one I just gave you?
ChatGPT
Yes, there is a difference in the calculated watts between the earlier example and the most recent calculation with the updated parameters you provided. Here's a comparison:
Earlier Calculation (with initial example parameters):
Mass: 10 kg
Height: 5 meters
Difference in Power: Approximately 40.88 watts
Recent Calculation (with your updated parameters):
Mass: 13 kg
Height: 2.4 meters
Difference in Power: Approximately 25.51 watts
The difference in the calculated power output can be attributed to the change in the parameters of mass and height. In the recent calculation with a 13 kg weight and a drop height of 2.4 meters, the system has less potential energy due to the lower height, even though the mass is greater. The potential energy (Ep=mghEp=mgh) directly influences the work done (WW) by gravity, which in turn affects the calculated power (P=WtP=tW).
Therefore, the difference in the scenarios reflects how the potential energy available for conversion (and hence the work done by the system to overcome electromagnetic resistance) is contingent upon both the mass of the weight and the height from which it is dropped. With less potential energy available in the recent setup, the difference in power due to electromagnetic resistance (when comparing open circuit and short-circuited scenarios) is also less.
User
How can we correlate these differences? I had expected for results to be either linear, exponential or even logwise
ChatGPT
To correlate these differences in a way that reflects a linear, exponential, or logarithmic relationship, we need to consider the theoretical foundations of how power is calculated and how it might vary with changes in parameters such as mass and height.
Understanding the Relationships
Linear Relationship: A linear relationship implies that the change in one quantity results in a proportional change in another. In the context of your experiment, a linear relationship might be expected if the difference in power directly correlates with changes in mass or height in a simple additive or subtractive manner.
Exponential Relationship: An exponential relationship suggests that the change in one quantity results in a multiplicative change in another, often seen in processes that have rates of change proportional to their current value.
Logarithmic Relationship: A logarithmic relationship often describes scenarios where the rate of change decreases as the quantity increases, which could be relevant in systems where increases in one factor lead to diminishing returns in another.
Correlating the Differences
To establish a correlation, let's outline the theoretical basis for each parameter's impact:
Mass (mm): The work done by gravity (W=mghW=mgh) suggests a linear relationship with mass, as doubling the mass should, in theory, double the work done (and thus potentially double the power, assuming time (tt) remains constant).
Height (hh): Similarly, the relationship between height and work done is linear within the formula (W=mghW=mgh), suggesting that doubling the height should double the work done.
However, the power (P=WtP=tW) also depends on the time (tt), which introduces complexity. The time taken for the weight to drop (and thus the time in the power calculation) might not change linearly with mass or height due to factors like air resistance, the dynamics of the pulley system, and the electromagnetic interactions within the generator.
Analyzing the Results
Given the calculations we've done:
The first set of parameters (10 kg, 5 m) resulted in a power difference of approximately 40.88 watts.
The second set of parameters (13 kg, 2.4 m) resulted in a power difference of approximately 25.51 watts.
The relationship between the changes in parameters and the resulting power difference doesn't neatly fit into a linear, exponential, or logarithmic model without accounting for the dynamics of the entire system, including the impact of time (tt) which varies due to electromagnetic resistance and possibly other factors not strictly related to the mass or height.
Establishing a Correlation
To establish a precise correlation, you would need to:
Perform multiple runs varying one parameter at a time (either mass or height) while keeping all others constant.
Collect data on the time difference for each run.
Analyze the data set to determine if the relationship between the changed parameter and the resulting power difference fits a linear, exponential, or logarithmic trend.
Using statistical tools like regression analysis could help identify the nature of the relationship by comparing the coefficient of determination (R2R2) for linear, exponential, and logarithmic models to see which best fits your data.
Would you like to proceed with a hypothetical analysis or further discuss how to set up an experiment to explore these relationships?
____
-
AI right now is NOT a valid tool. While it may sometimes be accurate at other times it is way off base...
-
AI is easy, has been since long before it it became public.
It seems to be feeding you the same information that other members have been trying to explain for quite sometime.
It just happens to be long winded about it.
Read the information given to you by Chatty_4 the information given to you by MagnetJuice and MattM .
Step back, have a long thought about all the information you have been given , and rather than just flying into stuff, put on paper, in a note on your phone/computer, on here, a true plan of action so that both you and us know where you are going .
Bruce S
-
I understand Bruce :(
Please bare with me just a little longer.
I am not known for my information grasping abilities :(
I will come back for duty once I have new results that are worth sharing here in this thread.
-
I am soo sorry that I am still not there.
If I want to keep at an inner radius of 300mm then 1mm diam wires will just not make it (and I kind of knew already :( )
So even though @MagnetJuice, who I fully trust and love knows his stuff told me to always stay at and between 0.8mm diam and 1.3mm. (Now here comes the problem)
I only have 0.71mm diam wire in bulk. And this early in the process in where I still have not asked (out of shame and general reluctance because I can feel a crowd a bit) why these specific advised on dimensions of wires!
Anyways here goes with the 0.71mm wire test at 100 windings.
(the context is still a 300mm inner radius)
{1}no, this is not the way to link images :( I will figure out a way later. probably self hosted {/1}
haah yes I know what you are thinking. "But brandubly my dear conjurer of weird things. Why are you still on a 600mm inner radius then?"
Well that is a short cut.
Please forgive me that I really am not looking forward to hard work all the time. So sometimes shortcuts seem a viable option :)
The magnets are spaced and oriented as if they would be on an 300mm inner radius.
And since all I care about is frequency then, with my limited understanding , things are comparable.
and now I realize I was going a bit too fast but I just figured. heyy, why will we not let the 3 phase to dc rectification process take care of the little lower than aimed for voltage? :)
{1}no, this is not the way to link images :( I will figure out a way later. probably self hosted {/1}
Now please note that with thise full coils I am testing now we can actually simply extrapolate linearly. by 48 times.
Next up when my new variac is here is to see what kind of field I can get out of this coil when exposed to 52vDC
MOD EDIT, MERGE
if only paste images from clipboard would be here then I would have never resorted to linking.
In my defense though. Most of you,If not all. already know anyways what I do elsewhere.
{1} I changed my mind. I made a mistake. Hence my modifications in the previous post in this thread.{/1}
-
Reporting for duty Sir!!
So my plan to successfully get our squadron over the line is as follows;
First figure out a coil/magnet configuration that can reach 52 vAC(3p) at 3.7Hz.
If several are found then favor those at the lowest inner radius. {1}as that will decrease build costs and increase the torque the PMA will have to overcome electromagnetic resistance{/1}
Within those favorable configurations, measure the field of individual coils at 52 vDC.
If the field seems impressive (and I have no way other than a gut feeling to know yet :( ) then carry on with that setup towards the gravity torque test.
If there is a noticeable (dare I suggest scary) amount of watts to be had in breaking force only then start building the whole PMA.
And then we see what this rather large torque of the turbine (because it is a rather large turbine) can do with that.
And I realize we can never get more out of the wind then there is in it. And then we have the Betz limit that spoils the party even more. And then we have the fact that I am using the utmost worst performing blades we can ever imagine :(
But if, and only if, that would do something wonderful then I am all for it. And with wonderful is that we can trickle charge a 48V batter array on slow days and power the whole planet on brutal days then that is a fantastic goal is not it? :) how ever naive and fantastical :)
But at least the PMA will not be the problem then. That beast will be ready and waiting for duty!!
Then once I grow more confident about my abilities to make a turbine sturdy, should I have time left in this world, then I can consider about going lift type blades and what have we. And even making the structure floating.
I need all the help I can get Bruce. I am not ashamed to admit that so I ask all the time :)
AI is easy, has been since long before it it became public.
It seems to be feeding you the same information that other members have been trying to explain for quite sometime.
It just happens to be long winded about it.
Read the information given to you by Chatty_4 the information given to you by MagnetJuice and MattM .
Step back, have a long thought about all the information you have been given , and rather than just flying into stuff, put on paper, in a note on your phone/computer, on here, a true plan of action so that both you and us know where you are going .
Bruce S
-
I am soo sorry that I am still not there.
If I want to keep at an inner radius of 300mm then 1mm diam wires will just not make it (and I kind of knew already :( )
So even though @MagnetJuice, who I fully trust and love knows his stuff told me to always stay at and between 0.8mm diam and 1.3mm. (Now here comes the problem)
I only have 0.71mm diam wire in bulk. And this early in the process in where I still have not asked (out of shame and general reluctance because I can feel a crowd a bit) why these specific advised on dimensions of wires!
Anyways here goes with the 0.71mm wire test at 100 windings.
(the context is still a 300mm inner radius)
{1}no, this is not the way to link images :( I will figure out a way later. probably self hosted {/1}
haah yes I know what you are thinking. "But brandubly my dear conjurer of weird things. Why are you still on a 600mm inner radius then?"
Well that is a short cut.
Please forgive me that I really am not looking forward to hard work all the time. So sometimes shortcuts seem a viable option :)
The magnets are spaced and oriented as if they would be on an 300mm inner radius.
And since all I care about is frequency then, with my limited understanding , things are comparable.
and now I realize I was going a bit too fast but I just figured. heyy, why will we not let the 3 phase to dc rectification process take care of the little lower than aimed for voltage? :)
{1}no, this is not the way to link images :( I will figure out a way later. probably self hosted {/1}
Now please note that with thise full coils I am testing now we can actually simply extrapolate linearly. by 48 times.
Next up when my new variac is here is to see what kind of field I can get out of this coil when exposed to 52vDC
MOD EDIT, MERGE
if only paste images from clipboard would be here then I would have never resorted to linking.
In my defense though. Most of you,If not all. already know anyways what I do elsewhere.
{1} I changed my mind. I made a mistake. Hence my modifications in the previous post in this thread.{/1}
Can wind 2 in hand and be equivalent to 1mm.
Quit worrying about the field produced by the coil with voltage applied, it has zero bearing on this!
-
yet again I was at fault, not AI. for so it seems. In where I first though that there was no linearity I now think there is.
Sure it is not perfect but close enough that I call this linear.
JW, I am going to make a suggestion in a DM with other mods :)
-
@MagnetJuice,
These magnets you suggested are INSANE!
Even though of a lower grade than the ones we use here, and therefor a relatively lower peak field at the center center of a pole. The field is like a mushroom cloud only Oppenheimer could have imagined!!
MK II of the alternator will be 192 of those!!
this is getting ridiculous :)
-
@MagnetJuice,
These magnets you suggested are INSANE!
Even though of a lower grade than the ones we use here, and therefor a relatively lower peak field at the center center of a pole. The field is like a mushroom cloud only Oppenheimer could have imagined!!
MK II of the alternator will be 192 of those!!
this is getting ridiculous :)
I am getting really nervous now gang. Given the extreme superiority of the magnets above versus the one we have here I am kind of winding into a negative spiral.
I mean all things considered 16 x these over powered (in this context) magnets vs 192 x a lesser magnet can't be a match already decided yes?
someone please help me out of my misery!
-
So I could really use some of our readers gut feelings here as I am about to start building but before I do I need to make a choice between serpentine and closed loop coils.
I will lay out the pro's and cons for each option as far as my research has told me. And sure I could have done things wrong and am drawing the wrong conclusions but such is life and I need to get going!
serpentine:
pro:
* there is a magnetic field between all legs making for a more spread field over all the magnets.
con:
* there will be no more ability to modularize the PMA (de) installation if we are going for maximum coil density.
* if we would accept the start and end coils of each phase to be half density then modularization is still possible.
* we'd probably end up with a few failed attempts thus wasting quite some copper wire.
closed loop:
pro:
* easy to wind and install
con:
* there is no magnetic field in between coils of the same phase.
choices choices. I am leaning towards serpentine though but I really could use some gut feelings one might have.
{1}I forgot to mention that stacking coils is basically the same thing as serpentine as far I have understood my results thus far. But then with more wire length which I am still not sure about if that is a good or bad thing. I am leaning towards we should keep the resistance in the wires to a minimum but I have read other sources suggesting the contra yet I do not remember where{/1}
-
With your stick magnets could you run a stack of mini-coils in serial to boost voltage? Perhaps instead of 30 wraps you stack three 10s in a line.
-
I tried that once in pairs of 2. not 3. But than rather narrow over only the magnet width of 10mm.
The results were so abysmal that I quickly burried that work and never told anyone about it :)
But I guess you are suggesting to break up a full shaped coil into separated parts? That I have not tried yet.
But I can only imagine it will hurt the field forming abilities whilst boosting the voltage forming abilities.
But if you could give me a little bit more of your train of thought then why not I just try it out for size?
-
With your stick magnets could you run a stack of mini-coils in serial to boost voltage? Perhaps instead of 30 wraps you stack three 10s in a line.
I just figured why this probably will not work. That is if I understood your intend correctly.
The length of the coil legs in the field is a factor in voltage creation. If we break this up into smaller parts then we will be adding relatively less of leg length into the field and adding more resistance to phase in total because of the extra wire needed to close the loops.
-
I tried to post a pic but got sidetracked.
I hadn't seen the length of the coil leg being so critical, just area. That would impair the strategy in that case unless using wedge coils to maximixe area.
-
hmm ok well it should be easy enough to experimentally find out whether it is about the area of wires in a field (also translated as the total length of the wire in a field)
or like I propose about the length of the wire that runs perpendicular to the motion of the field.
Now if the orientation of the wire does not matter than that opens up a whole new world of possibilities. I am going a little overboard now but then having 2mm diam micro coils is becoming a possibility.
But just try putting a coil on its side when running magnets over it. I found it does next to nothing. I am not sure if this is related or that I drawn the wrong conclusions. And what ever it did do any field that might have been produced will never reach the magnets.
However, my vantage point is a coil shape that matches the magnet positioning.
If you were referring to circular coils then all bets are off and we might find something wild indeed :)
{1}after more thought it will probably be a dead end. Now I am willing to try because of respect for the community and why not lets try things yes
But, by my current visualisation, the micro coils will end up getting opposing induced currents and end up doing next to nothing
{/1}
-
Brandnewb,
YOUR POSTING TO MUCH
your crowding the forum.
You are being rude to the long time users.
If you keep it up I will delete your account. the admins wont be able to recover your account.
JW
-
Im just going to say it once. "Jonny Cool pants"
-
look I've done bunch of work with EV's and was awarded a Patent US 8261575 B1
Its for a traction motor for a Low Volt EV. the battery's that exist cant be used, Lead acid, Lithium.
We need to develop a battery that's in the middle.
JW
-
You tell him he posts too much as you post 3 times in a row, you're not making any sense, JW. Sorry :(
I do agree he occasionally posts multiple times in a row and it's generally frowned upon, however, if it's a legitimate status update after a day or two, he can do so, because other users would NOT get a notification about his last post being edited in the meantime and would miss the update.
Some posts I did merge them myself, as they were genuinely unnecessarily too quick.
-
I posted that many times in a row, so he could see what its like. compare the number of the front page between my posts and his, a total. yes I could have edited my posts but he's not doing that.
I don't care 3 months back everything was fine. Before he started posting. look I've got 10 grand invested in this place over 20 years. As mentioned previously I did this to preserve the data base.
I'm sorry when you have a user name that says I'm an idiot, its not right.
JW
-
Ahhh ok, I see what you mean now for the posts. Still, it's good he's engaging with the forum at least :)
-
Im just going to say it once. "Jonny Cool pants"
hahahh that one I am going to carve into the turbine if You will allow for it :) So the Phoenix her name is now officially "Jonny Cool pants" :) (again if you will allow for it that is JW)
Now I am not sure about my posting interval.
I mean the time difference between
Reply #160 on: March 13, 2024, 01:42:39 PM
and in reaction to MattM I posted again on
March 13, 2024, 10:07:58 PM
How is that time difference too short? And I also am making use of the {x}{/x} edits to lessen the noise.
You know what to come meet you half way I would be ok is this thread would be merged with the non logged in VAWT experiments. After all it is the same project.
Just allow me to post publicly the results when all is said and done and then everything is fine in my books.
-
Im just going to say it once. "Jonny Cool pants"
hahahh that one I am going to carve into the turbine if You will allow for it :) So the Phoenix her name is now officially "Jonny Cool pants" :) (again if you will allow for it that is JW)
Now I am not sure about my posting interval.
I mean the time difference between
Reply #160 on: March 13, 2024, 01:42:39 PM
and in reaction to MattM I posted again on
March 13, 2024, 10:07:58 PM
How is that time difference too short? And I also am making use of the {x}{/x} edits to lessen the noise.
You know what to come meet you half way I would be ok is this thread would be merged with the non logged in VAWT experiments. After all it is the same project.
Just allow me to post publicly the results when all is said and done and then everything is fine in my books.
A daily update to you diary would cover it... I often post to a notepad document for the day then update a forum at the end of the day if I am in the middle of a project. Less clutter and disjointed hard to follow posts... allows editing into a seamless story line before copy and pasting to the forum...
-
You know what to come meet you half way I would be ok is this thread would be merged with the non logged in VAWT experiments. After all it is the same project.
Huhhhh I'm not sure we want to do that, all posts would get mixed in chronological order and it would be an absolute mess, I would request all mods/admins to actually refrain from merging them, as undoing that would be *considerably* more complicated.
Like, I understand your point of view and agree with it, but from a forum perspective it's bad :D
-
interesting quote-
The Betz limit is the theoretical maximum efficiency for a wind turbine, conjectured by German physicist Albert Betz in 1919. Betz concluded that this value is 59.3%, meaning that at most only 59.3% of the kinetic energy from wind can be used to spin the turbine and generate electricity.
Next comes TSR (tip speed rotation)
For a VWAT you need to search for that info relates to that.
At the bottom of the page on the main page there is a google search thingyee. search that for VWAT turbine. There is tonns of info here in our database.
-
Disclaimer:
Google search will only go through public boards and works great.
Internal search (top of the page) includes everything the person starting the search has access to. However, it may (and will) come up with very irrelevant results (OLD), so in case you're looking for something not in a public board you may want to be restricting the date on the internal search.
-
We are hosted in the US last I checked the server is in Atlanta GA I cant talk about HLS.
Flavio has done a great job.... For no one has been able to login to our server for months maybe a year.
And swear to god if I hear someone mention a "6 digit security pin" Im gonna hit them in the head thru my land line.
Yesterday I got really really close I will keep trying.
-
And swear to god if I hear someone mention a "6 digit security pin" Im gonna hit them in the head thru my land line.
LOL ;D
-
the US is not known for it's privacy advocating legislation. So maybe I should warn the coils to not go there :)
Anyway. I am zeroing in on results. I could really use some pointers here :)
can I past images again? not even going to try unless told we can.
-
the US is not known for it's privacy advocating legislation.
This is nonsense!! AND only your opinion
Bruce S
-
well it is certainly not nonsense but yes I will admit it is of my opinion.
Just look at the differences between the EU and the US in regards of citizen privacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
But in your defense the rest of the world is, in my opinion, equally behind in protecting us.
Then we have of course the DMA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act
I have a personal strong benefit by this law as a developer of a mobile application.
For years Apple has thrown sand in our eyes and now, at least in the Eu, they can no longer do so.
So yes it is my opinion that these facts support my earlier made statement :)
-
well it is certainly not nonsense but yes I will admit it is of my opinion.
Just look at the differences between the EU and the US in regards of citizen privacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
your bringing up politics, we don't don't do that here, its one over policy's here. And you are in violation of that here/now.
I cant recommend another website that will accommodate what you are doing here.
This site is purely tech site.
You may have to find another website to post in.
JW
-
I agree, please keep politics out of here and go back to coil :D I'm rather looking forward to the end of this thread and some kind of formula/solution discovery.
-
please accept my humble apologies.
I understand and agree with your assessment.
respect
-
I can already tell that running 96 magnets at 3.7 Hz at a 3.75 degree spacing per disk. And both disks spaced at 17mm from each other will never get me to where I need to get using 0.71mm diam wires.
You see I can only get 31 coil legs in that space to have 3 phases non overlapped. yes yes yes I abandoned overlapping phases because it just leaves no space for cores and although unconfirmed I now again think it will hinder the field forming abilities of coils.
So either we increase the rotation speed of the PMA or we decrease the wire thickness.
choices choices.
Now here comes the conundrum.
How can a gravity torque test ever be useful if it depends on the field the electromagnets (coils) produce. And that means they need to be rotated over at service speed. Not at all a gravity torque test can ever provide.
Someone like @joestru please get back in here and make some sense out of this all :(
-
We don't have actual mentions... *Cough*... Yet. I do hope he sees this :D
-
31 coil legs?
-
31 coil legs?
yes. in a stacked (or twisted) serpentine coil configuration coils share legs.
but I still can't post images so here I go again :(
https://diysolarforum.com/threads/building-the-sickest-%C2%AE-vawt-ever-brilliant-minds-unite-please.31934/post-1044317
it is basically one big 100 winds loop but because it is stacked the central legs will have double the amount of wires. The field in the first and last coil is just as strong as the fields in the central coils even though having only 75% of the wires.
{1}unless I am making a huge blinder again I think this stacked serpentine is far superior to the standard closed loop coils. Just think about it. we get around 200% electromagnetic field (ignoring the wire savings) as opposed to standard closed loop coils. And then the overall reduction in wire length. I mean only properly conducted gravity torque tests can be of help now if we want hard proof.
I for one have made my commitment based on my data. How ever poorly taken. It is almost as if I show sings of faith :) almost! :)
{/1}
-
No one can upload photos at this time, I'm still working on this. wait for an update.
JW
-
So I think I have figured out a way to really compare apples to apples when it comes to coils in the context of the current dual rotor disk and each having their 96 magnets at a 3.75 degree interval.
And whether adding iron powder does any good in terms permeability of the field between the magnets of the rotor disks and thus will lead to an enhanced voltage generation ability of the coil.
This is my hypothesis. It has been for quite a while.
Now please jump in here and present the possible errors of my plan if you can spot one as consensus is all I care about.
So the idea is to have 2 identical 3 legged serpentine coils of 36 winds. Identical other than one is filled with basic resin and the other is filled with iron powder.
Yet both of them will be squeezed to their absolute minimum. I am guessing something of like 3 to 4mm will remain.
Now we know for sure that all the wires are concentrated on a fairly single plane.
Now we can start adding both sides of both coils with their respective resin composition (without any more wires of course) equally to reach their intended thickness.
The result will be a super thin few mm of wires in the center of the full 15mm coil.
And now, and only if I can make sure that both coils are equally positioned enough between the disks.
Only NOW we can take tests seriously.
Now mind you even the last part is no small feat. But I will get there.
Now before I break my head on actually doing this. Is there anyone that can see an error in the idea? I mean what is the point going through all this trouble if no one will take the data seriously and no one will take my test setup I offer to reproduce said results.
-
I would like to get notifications again of when I get feed backback on my content. Just like it has been for quite a while before.
Am I unaware of some kind of setting change that I really should be of?
-
I would like to get notifications again of when I get feed backback on my content. Just like it has been for quite a while before.
Am I unaware of some kind of setting change that I really should be of?
Emails aren't working either, most likely.
-
early tests failed hard :( I thought why not only test the central shallow slab with the coils in them of both coils first. They are roughly 4.5mm thickness.
Also I made both slabs 35 winds resulting in a 35 -70 -35 configuration. Please never ask why I went for 36 while in theory 32 should have been enough already!
hahha well that flew back in my face like a boomerang as the iron powdered coil slab kept bending. who would have ever thought that 4.5mm of iron powder filled resin is not rigid enough to not bend with these kinds of fields around them :) ?
So I really have to extend the process now. Going to fill up both coils to 15mm in thickness and then finally be able to make some sense of this iron powder use.
And you already know that I do not mind if I can not demonstrate anything useful in terms of voltage generation ability. I will also report my failures.
However I still am considering still using this iron powered filled casting just to help the heat dissipation ability.
But now we have another challenge. How can we make sure that the casting process was rigid enough to prevent the 150 um sized particles of powder to stay put. Never move else risk chipping away at the enamel.
I'll be honest. I do not think that any configuration in terms of frequency will ever allow for this powder to allow to chip away at the enamel. Because the particles at ultra high frequencies will just get lazy and do nothing. (please do not trust this to be actual science!! this is just my effort to visualize it for my self)
Now then one, including myself, wonders. Why did coil #1 shorted out in earlier tests then?
hmm
I am still at a loss. Maybe just that coil did not like a massage and then went on strike?
Ahh and here lies the possible answer. I just used too much force during the installation process for it to short out. But truth be told I am no scientist so my own data could contradict my interpretation of said data if I just was good and making sense of all this.
Anyway. All systems go!!!
@MattM. Do you remember the thunderbird countdown?
we are now at 2 seconds before liftoff.
-
Ive been following your other blog updates. I think 0 is go.
-
Ive been following your other blog updates. I think 0 is go.
{1}dear brother, you know of course I meant all this below in good fun yes?{/1}
hahha why would you respond in such an ambiguous manner when you know you are dealing with the weird mind I have. :)
to me this means either you are waiting for things to lift of at 0 because you already have a sense that we are on the right track
or
yeah no matter what these early results have gotten us thus far. we are still not at 0 yet so only then we will know. and a GO can go horribly wrong as spaceX has been showing us.
:)
you see how life is full of choices? too many I must say.
-
I have confidence there will be plenty of electrical harvesting with your 4:1 gear ratio.
-
hahha well that flew back in my face like a boomerang as the iron powdered coil slab kept bending. who would have ever thought that 4.5mm of iron powder filled resin is not rigid enough to not bend with these kinds of fields around them :) ?
So I really have to extend the process now. Going to fill up both coils to 15mm in thickness and then finally be able to make some sense of this iron powder use.
I'm a bit concerned about this. Is the resin actually bending when the magnets swing by it? That could mean a few things.
1) Resin pour was too thin to hold up under the forces
2) Resin wasn't completely dry and allowed the pour to bend
3) wrong type of resin? Most that I've used in the past was 2-part type that once hardened was going anywhere, though I did do a few very thin pours on purpose that would bend.
Bruce S
-
this particular easy flow poly resin does solidify well enough into a rigid structure when we take into account that most of the space is copper wires.
these slabs are pressed down on hard to obtain a minimal layer which in the grander tests should be central. I just thought like this;
heyy now I have got 2 slabs to play with. One powder filled and one without.
Like a toldler I just went at it.. I mean why not try it?
And then indeed even though there are not many iron particles in that slab when we are talking in terms of %.
Well the 230 mT field in the middle sure likes to cause all kinds of bending trouble though.
so your 1) remark is what is at play here.
2) nah, this is an easy flow poly resin that is ready to fight within 2 minutes.
3) it might be the wrong type in the grander scheme of things. but for these early test runs it is perfect as it does not stick very well to my PLA print templates and hardens soo fast I can't even squeeze a bathroom break in between.
and I forgot to mention that this is all without the magnets rotating. this is all during install time.
https://syntecshop.com/en/easyflo-60-polyurethane-resin-shore-d-65-fast-curedlow-viscosity
https://syntecshop.com/en/easyflo-60-polyurethane-resin-shore-d-65-fast-curedlow-viscosity
I do respect the poking. And please keep at it.
I call it a form of peer review.
But never let it be said that I was unable to explain myself ok?
And this message is in particular not to Bruce!
DD
I really need to get one thing out of the way once and for all.
I do not do hypocritical stuff or use my words in a cynical way.
Sure I contradict my self at times but boy am I easy to land back where I departed from.
Now all that is important here to me is; How can we find the means to actually quantify what a PMA can do.
-
I merged your posts, can't tell JW that he's wrong for getting mad when you're posting 4 times in a row for no good reason :/ PLEASE edit your posts if you want to quickly add informations to what you already said, there are 2 buttons for it.
-
thank you brother,
I will admit that some if not most of the front user experience facing issues are because my browser is relentless in not allowing any kind of funny stuff.
I just do think even this simple machine software can be configure to just stop with the probing already!!!!!!!!!
other than that of course I am a loyal citizen here and I would love to show my results.
-
Ok Sir,
Please see if I am following your lead well enough of that I need to make changes.
I have the gravity torque setup ready now. I think.
(Attachment Link)
And this time I will test the failed 6 coil stacked 3 phase arrangement.
It failed because the coils moved during the curing so now there is no longer a perfect 1.25 degree of separation between each phase.
Also this test is too thick and too heavy and also just not homogeneous enough.
Nah I will do it much better next try.
{1}Also a single coil of 300 winds at 0.4mm is 92 grams net. So excluding any resin around it.{1}
(Attachment Link)
Can you please elaborate a bit on what is OD and ID.
And what is it I am testing for again?
In my previous thread you mentioned we are looking for the sweet spot for how much mechanical resistance the coils can provide to the magnets to produce amperage or something to that extend.
Is this still related?
The point is to find the optimal inner and outer diameter and thickness of a coil that provides the most resistance.
The problem is, the magnet's radius is also a variable. You cant have the magnets too far apart, because when you connect all the coils together, the current is flowing through other coils which are not producing voltage.. so ideally you need 3 test coils, connected in Y, but shorted. Or perhaps better, rectify the test coils and short the rectifier.
So you want to keep your magnet and coil ratio, and magnet spacing (both are variables you can change) such that you ether get a clean sine wave, or a trapezoid, but if your magnets are too far apart, you get a sine wave ish pulse, followed by dead space, then a pulse of the opposite polarity, and this will be worse.. unless you rectify every coil separately.
I am ready finally. I can now do anything you suggest just like @joestru.
This hint is that I am ready and waiting with sensors. To measure .
just in general what I do not like is that fair interaction is not persuaded on.
-
I am not ready at all :(
You see the gravity torque test is not working out :(
It is proving really difficult to get the PMA rotating at the intended speed with the coils closed.
So for a 29 leg coil of 5x 0.4mm litz wire I got only around 22 watts. (I had to wind the coil a little less than the intended 31 legs because I never realized that when adding wires in parallel we will need more length ;) so I ended up short thus the 29 coil legs )
I dropped a weight of 6 kg from 2.163 m height.
and open coil it took 4.95 sec
closed coil it took 45.32 seconds but the end speed was nearly not high enough as the intended speed.
I can add weights but there will always be a ramp up time needed and also then the disk would start spinning far too fast with the coils open.
Either I do not get how to properly conduct the gravity torque test or it is just not applicable in this scenario.
I do think though that this 5x 0.4 litz wired coil is not better than a single 1mm wired coil as the area is still less.
0.4 mm diam = 0.12566 mm2 * 5 = 0.6283 mm2
1 mm diam = 0.7854 mm2
what a complete waste having bought huge spools of 0.4 and 0.71mm wires.
if anyone can think of a good use for that?
I am now looking for a reliable way to measure the amps in the coils while shorted so that i can have the motor spin at the intended speed and then calculate the wattage the coils produce.
What would be the best tool to do that an accurate amp measurement?
-
I am happy to report progress.
so after a considerable amount of extra experiments I found that there might be a good reason to use smaller diam wires after all.
You see that I now hold the believe that while using litz wired coils one can have more wires exposed to the field where it matters as opposed to a single larger diam wire.
And since we are talking about AC here rather than the DC tests I run for establishing a field strength there is soo much less heat build up as the electrons go back and forth thus constantly not going at full speed. (this is just what I think there is going on. totally not based on actual science!!)
Please allow me to explain.
Does one remember when I asked to hold ones buttocks most recently?
Well that was a single wired 35-70-35 coil in but 3mm.
When spun over close to the magnets it spewed out an insane amount of vAC. More insane than I have ever seen in similar conditions with only the coil as parameter. It was for sure the most impressive voltage generation I have ever seen in my line of testing yet. In that context of course. Sure I have seen higher values but that was because the coils were more potent.
Now please remember how sad I was when I was unable to demonstrate a beneficial voltage generation ability when a similar coil was backed up by iron powder.
Yeah that pretty much stopped me dead in my believe that I can think of new ways of demonstrating my hypotheses. I for one for now still do not know any other experiment I can try.
Well 2 things turned out in favor of good old iron powder in the long run. Hahah what did you expect gang? That I would lets things go that fast?
It turns out that having the coil legs of this said coil being backed by iron powder legs then the field it produces at 32 vDC is around 13 mT rather than the 10mT when not backed.
Ok Ok I'll be honest. I am not even sure I actually correlate those two findings. So just let us put that in the freezer for now.
And then of course the second thing which was actually not a new thing but the insane heat dissipation enhancement it all brings.
So I am going to take shortcuts now as I can't create charts that will satisfy everyone.
So I will make the next few posts on what charts I am going to make and then allow for suggestions on how to fine tune them before I actually start going deep and start endless measurements.
Also I have some other good news. Remember when I said that 3mm was minimum? (the narrower one can make a coil the more field it will produce where it matters (close to the magnets)) Hahahah turns out though that that was not even the minimum thickness.
Nah, this will be my baseline coil after some consideration. I have one thing holding me back though. Perhaps a 35-70-70-35 configuration would be better. Please share your thoughts.
[attach=1]
The niche part about this test coil is is that it is but 10mm thick while boasting a litz wire of 5 x 0.4 mm.
One thing I do know already is that but 1 wire out of that lists wire will produce around 7 mT at 32 vDC. But my lab equipment is not up to the job when exposed to 5 times this simple coil. It just starts being unable to just blast on.
Anyway with my farmers logic I get to around 35 mT.
wait what? 35 mT holy smokes!! if that is true.
Yeah my thoughts exactly. I hate it when a plan does not come together as I clearly did not buy the correct lab equipment to be able to run scientific analysis at this scale.
More to follow on how I plan to document things before we actually go and do it.
{1}this is the magnet configuration
[attach=2]
{/1}
-
anyway gang. I could spend time on lifting over images which I had hoped to be pasted ove via clipboard. But ok let us not dwell.
The question I do have is since I am steamrolling towards something concrete is are we still here interested?
I mean I just soo much would like for joe to jump back on the wagon again but OKEAY. I can only want and never more than that. It is rather upsetting though that one leadsa towards a cliff and then when the legion is before it does not explain how to jump from it.
Just please realize that I then am going to make my own way on how to make a test to see what a coil magnet configuration can do. And then these results will be hung proud and ready for criticism.
But when those voices come soo late it leaves an after taste.
However.
Never in scientific development is it too late to jump in and challenge a statement. NEVER.
-
We recently fixed the image upload function, this happed to all users not just you.
-
that is good news JW.
anyway I am going to do the following.
Just hook up this test coil and hook up an amp meter while the coils is shorted.
then just ramp up the motor speed until the coil stabilzes at 70C.
then open up the coil to no longer be shorted and measaurew the voltage.
and then we have our wattage capabilities?
is it that simple?
-
Brandnewb, do not tease us lol
-
hahsah brother. You know I am not a tease. I often get right into business :)
anyway gang.
Please review this better representation of the magnet configuration.
I am moving forward yet there is still time to raise objections or improvements to the way I represent my setup/
The setup is what it is and I am past the point of no return now to change that unless I find something wild that changes my mind.
[attach=1]
I will make sure to measure all of the positions I think are of interest in terms of magnetic field to start with.
{1}
Is everyone still in the believe this is going to suck in terms of wattage capabilities?
I for one never did.
I just cant see yet why it would not blow things out of the water. But I am always open to be wrong.
{/1}
-
from this point in time I vote to have this kind of ground work be done before one starts selling a PMA.
NO
I propose that at least there should be done the next;
* voltage over frequency (try and convert that to RPM)
* amperage at RMP
* heat at given RPM
Now I might have just never read in all the literature online or also in the books I have been persuaded to go and buy because there is where the knowledge lies.
I will admit though that the source material is full of the good stuff. This is defensively one should use as a primer.
Yet in this fringe case there are o rules yet. I get to set them when I see fit. :)
we are beyond this point. Now we get to use more tools like the tesla meter. j
{1}I meant to say that most senior members while "helping" me never really were able to then go at it and help me understand
I mean sure i am below well informed. Also slow of grasp.
Yet I am smart enough to know that that is not really a good reason to stop helping.
{/1}
-
Brandnewb, do not tease us lol
No really Brother. I need to know what you actually meant to convey!! :(
-
Brandnewb, do not tease us lol
No really Brother. I need to know what you actually meant to convey!! :(
I'm guessing he meant it as a joke to help lighten the mood, especially after the long awaited return to being able to post picks again.
Bruce S
-
Thank you Bruce,
understood gang.
I am still open to some more of this mental support like Bruce et al. have been displaying,
Look I am a small fish playing with big concepts. It is easy enough to just accept defeat.
-
I have an idea.
As I am a genuine owner of the books that were laid out to be paramount else not ever get there.
Also it has been said that concrete questions will be entertained by said author.
Would not this be a right time in time to ask for a 2nd opinion? more over from the man himself?
I am just looking to see where I derailed with my logic. Unless I ever did of course.
I am open to a vote to see if we should wake up the minds behind the minds
-
Your project has an audience. We await pictures.
-
well then do not bring forth said prophets if no one is willing to follow/defend them.
I have many more of these ideas regarding topics.
I realize I am loud. But this message is important.
I am sure you all can translate these ramblings. if not I am open for dialogue
-
Check it out, we follow a standard of logic here, Basically we are a group of engineers. You are operating 3 ideas at once.
carry on.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm%27s_law
The 3 forms of the math equations you see on that first page is what I'm referring to.
-
well then do not bring forth said prophets if no one is willing to follow/defend them.
Name those prophets so they can defend themselves or for someone else to defend them.
-
I am happy to see at least I am still being challenged about my statements.
Which his good and important!!
I am less so thrilled about amonsts other my dear brother ED. And Joe.
Look brothers. I will understand that you have more important things to do than to educate a lost sole like my self.
But when inserting information / ideas and then to not follow up on the to be expected followups that then becomes in my books a bit less about helping and a little more about unintened confusion that might follow.
Anyways I was refering to the authors of the books / projects. You all know who I am talking about I just donit have it on hand right now.
The point I made earlier is that I bought both books of. yes finally I remember while typing. Mr Piggot. And I bought all magnets as suggested based on a design by the other 'prophet'
@magnetjuice, I think for now the focus should not be on your involvement as I am still figuring out on how to quantify.
Anyway there I went buying books either paperback or e-form.
This was me signaling to the ones helping/ (or al least signaling to me that I am bonkers and here you can get your head checked) me that I am willing to take drastic measures and leave no stone unturned.
My findings (with my limited reading capabilities) that any of those sources do not explain well how to use the findings in those resources to be of benefit to what it is I am trying to do.
And then the discussion died out pretty quicly as it seems the ones promoting said material also did not know how to deal with that one.
Sure I have been advised here before that Mr Piggot is open to concrete questions but for the life of me I dare not even start asking him as I do not even know how to properly condense these years of efforts I have under my belt.
Now by the tone of your question to me it still makes me think that I am more of a nuance than of a potential benefit. I am so sorry I come accros like that to some.
But in the end of the day I will go and do what needs to be done my dear brother. I hope you can help me out. Actually without your help and of other great minds this project is going to take much more time and perhaps even end up doing the opposite as it is inteded to.
You see if I build my premises and conclusions an based on bad understanding because I have not been challenged by the people in the know while I was forming ideas and plans.
Then my results, that I believe are trustworthy. Might actually serve as a base line for new generations while the results were never sound to begin with.
The moral of this all is that I still think I should just keep experimenting. Like just throw stuff on the wall and see what sticks kind of method.
The big difference with some charlatans is that I will fully show what never even reached the wall as well as what does stick.
My reputation depends on honesty.
{1}
hahha actually NO. I will not show anything that does not stick or not even reaches the wall. That is just too much of a burden.
the amount of tests I have run, some of them complete bonkers. is well..... bonkers
But I guess you have gotten the jist yes?
{/1}
EDIT: please never mistake me again for someone that just rambles for the rambling only.
Sure I invented rambling but I always have my ethics to back it up when challenged.
So here you go.
-
Make coils, build machine, test, make a new stator if needed, test, revamp the structural parts as needed, test... some things CAN NOT be 10% decided on pen and paper... guys with access to supercomputers even make mistakes running their models!
-
#1
OK dear Ed,
I am now going to make profound statement that does include you. My dear brother.
You see that is was your mention that the earlier magnets had a (but) 1.2KW potential.
And then I asked publicly to lean more of course.
Well that never happened that then the following happened.
I just took that statement as a given and then become really worried as my project should certainly do an insane amount more that that does not it?
hahah we all know what happened next.
Yes I bought an extra 96 of these magnets. And these suggestions came @warpspeed. he is one of those contributors that comes in and then helps and then forgoes to contribute
(I mean certainly now you know that there are many many reasons that more than 3 phase is something to consider yes??
Ok now we have that part done and dealt with unless one is willing to challenge the 7 phase P&F setup.
#2
so you see how much the words of perceived higher powers can influence the actions of new comers like my self?
I am just happy that I always bounce back.
this is warning to all with power.
use it well and then you may lead us.
until such time we see that it is no longer used well.
#3
Make coils, build machine, test, make a new stator if needed, test, revamp the structural parts as needed, test... some things CAN NOT be 10% decided on pen and paper... guys with access to supercomputers even make mistakes running their models!
lMay/ I have tired to give the best response I cane to give. For more than 20 minutes.I give up It is an actual really involved process so I am actually not wanting to this this any longer
#4
Your project has an audience. We await pictures.
sorry my dear bother. I realize now that I am failing to hold 2 channels in equal status.
Especial since one is in dire need of some basic upgrades.
Anyway brother.
Please help me out here. What images should I still deliver?
I am at your service!!
#5
Make coils, build machine, test, make a new stator if needed, test, revamp the structural parts as needed, test... some things CAN NOT be 10% decided on pen and paper... guys with access to supercomputers even make mistakes running their models!
Thank you love. you are one of the few voices of reason that is sooo much needed
#6
Make coils, build machine, test, make a new stator if needed, test, revamp the structural parts as needed, test... some things CAN NOT be 10% decided on pen and paper... guys with access to supercomputers even make mistakes running their models!
I so want to get to meet you once.
when is the next get to gether.
BTW, I am somewhat of an in the middle person.
Some cops see my credentials and welcome me and some do the opposite
hahha weird yes?
Well it is true no the less.
#7
Check it out, we follow a standard of logic here, Basically we are a group of engineers. You are operating 3 ideas at once.
carry on.
dear brother.
I will admit that I sometimes are more loud then is normal.
I will also even admit that sometimes I even just spew out incoherence stuff.
We all know it. we have had a good night out on the town with friends and got a little closer to existential nihilism than one should have.
Ahh yes we all remember the next day yes? in where we vow to never drink again.
hahah that lasted but 1 hour while you drink your left overs to get rid of that headache.
Now of course this is just a comic representation of what a young student might experience.
But are we not all in many ways still young and students?
-
@brandnewb this one comes from me, next time you post SEVEN times in a row (as in multiple times) I will personally mute you, you've been asked multiple times over and over again to edit your posts. There is absolutely no reason to do that, I will say JW had far too little patience about it but I can't say he's wrong about it if you check the attached screenshot. It kills visibility for other active topics and it's rude. Last warning.
-
I am not sure how to respond.
I though that activity was a good thing
And if there was too much of activity then it would be a simple tweak to the software,
I will give some pseudo code
If source of message == source of message && ( timedetalawithlastmessage)
I mean if I am able to drown out the stuff here while I have so many important things to add then let us us really figure out how to solve it.
I have always known that this simple machine software 3was a bit too simple. I am ready to help
-
Activity is fantastic and we appreciate your enthusiasm, but not at the cost of drowning everyone else's posts :)
Can I install a mod to prevent people from posting twice in a row? Yes, but is it really necessary to block users from doing something that can be occasionally useful just to prevent these kind of things? In my opinion it isn't, it hasn't been an issue for many years.
-
ok then unless Ed and Joe will reconsider their stance on letting me hang or actually helping me I will just for now wait until better minds come with better suggestions I can not know when I will erupt again but please trust that my lava is always reasonabl
Now dear TechAdmin. I think you trust that I hold you high to that is why I made my choices.
-
If I may :)
cooking some frozen Tilapia in the George Forman grill, have some good spice. looking forward to it.
Now we can use this off the grid.
-
ok then unless Ed and Joe will reconsider their stance on letting me hang or actually helping me I will just for now wait until better minds come with better suggestions I can not know when I will erupt again but please trust that my lava is always reasonabl
Now dear TechAdmin. I think you trust that I hold you high to that is why I made my choices.
a while back I suggested starting a daily post in word pad or other editor.
That way as you go thru the day you can add to and edit it and post on coherent response...
As is what we see is disjointed rambling that does NOT tell a story
-
Yes Mam,
Mary I think you already can trust I love you.
Now hold on to your buttocks everyone because this is going to be an earth shaker.
82 watts!! power potential in a mere 5 x 0.4 mm lits wired coil at a 35-70-35 configuration.
It was Mary that did nudge me to try out the wire in hand stuff of which I never found anything. But it did lead me to the Litz concept.
But shall I be honest? Why is Litz a thing? I mean running wires in parallel has been before us since when these scientific ideas were formed yes?
82 watt!! I hope I am not mistaken.
-
I think it is time to reintroduce the Gravity Torque Test (GTT) after all. So thank you Joestru for that one because I certainly would have needed another 40 to 60 years to come up with that one.
You see that this thread has a really simple goal. It is just the title it self.
Please may I offer for debate my latest iteration on how to do this right once and for all.
Just short ones coils then let the PMA spin up in a controlled manner and see at what rotational speed the PMA can become stable in terms of it's maximum operating temperature limit. In other words if your PMA breaks down at some point than you have to go slower next time you try :)
This is what I call the Coil Magnet Limit. CML for short to be sure.
But now we have a fun and important data point sure. But nothing we can use to compare apples to oranges.
Here I would like to reintroduce the GTT again.
You see that I can think of coil magnet configurations that can be exploited to signal a huge CML yet in practice do nothing.
The reason why is because of the field forming abilities of the coils are so different in each configuration that it needs to be taken into account.
That is not really done using the CMl test as the VFD that drives the motor probably has something like torque compensation. Mine has although I don't know what it does.
I know enough that this GTT is the one thing we can rely on if we need torque to be constant.
Now I will stop rambling now again for a while as I am still not even sure if this will even get out there. So I am also going to have to respect my own time.
Once I see things normalizing again I will try telling more about how far I have gotten tackling this REALLY important question.
-
Now I will stop rambling now again for a while as I am still not even sure if this will even get out there
It absolutely will, your posts increased in quality by several orders of magnitude, I am very glad to see that once you're calm and collected you're not rambling all the time and posting 7 times in a row, you're actually writing properly with some good points! Carry on like this :D
-
If you look up on Wikipedia on the top/ of what your trying to say, use grammar that Wikipedia provides. just don't copy/paste to the forum.