Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )  (Read 608520 times)

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #450 on: December 13, 2014, 11:29:17 PM »
Mister Caribbean Roots:

Quote
Well, it's really up to the builders if they want to know about someting or not...it all depends on what the purpose is when you build something... (http://overunity.com/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Do we want to learn about something and maybe improve it or do we just want to replicate it as a fun hobby project...

I can't disagree with you there.   However, if you are going to get technical and share technical information with your peers, then you want to say things that are correct and make sense.  You have a responsibility to do your own checking.  So for example, there is no "delayed Lenz effect."  Likewise, if you say, "When I add a generator coil to my pulse motor the the RPM decreases and the current consumption increases. Therefore the added mechanical load of the generator coil is the cause of the increased current consumption."  With a pulse motor, as we now know, there are many things that can affect the current consumption so that statement is not necessarily true.

MileHigh

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #451 on: December 13, 2014, 11:47:40 PM »
Mister Caribbean Roots:

I can't disagree with you there.   However, if you are going to get technical and share technical information with your peers, then you want to say things that are correct and make sense.  You have a responsibility to do your own checking.  So for example, there is no "delayed Lenz effect."  Likewise, if you say, "When I add a generator coil to my pulse motor the the RPM decreases and the current consumption increases. Therefore the added mechanical load of the generator coil is the cause of the increased current consumption."  With a pulse motor, as we now know, there are many things that can affect the current consumption so that statement is not necessarily true.

MileHigh
What is your take in regards to coil resistance MH. Is it better to have a coil of high resistance(many turns of small wire),or a coil with low resistance(few turns with a larger gauge wire)?. We will say our pulse motor will be useing a 12 volt power supply for the P/in.Our coils will be of the air core type. What coil would produce more losses in an identical setup?.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #452 on: December 13, 2014, 11:58:28 PM »
What is your take in regards to coil resistance MH. Is it better to have a coil of high resistance(many turns of small wire),or a coil with low resistance(few turns with a larger gauge wire)?. We will say our pulse motor will be useing a 12 volt power supply for the P/in.Our coils will be of the air core type. What coil would produce more losses in an identical setup?.
Tinman usually one figures out the voltage / current versus turns that can be supported with an acceptable temperature rise for a given winding shape.  Then the choice of wire diameter is made based on the maximum voltage of the available power supply and whether or not a chopping drive will limit current.   If no chopping is used, then temperature rise is the usual criteria.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #453 on: December 14, 2014, 12:22:06 AM »
Tinman usually one figures out the voltage / current versus turns that can be supported with an acceptable temperature rise for a given winding shape.  Then the choice of wire diameter is made based on the maximum voltage of the available power supply and whether or not a chopping drive will limit current.   If no chopping is used, then temperature rise is the usual criteria.
OK,i will make it a little clearer.
We are building a pulse motor(lets just say a simple SSG circuit).We are looking for torque and inductive kickback collection.We are useing a 12 volt battery as our P/in sorce,with a limit of 250mA for I/in. Our air core coil formers are of a fixed size.

So what we want to know is-->what would be better ,lots of turns of a smaller gauge wire(higher resistance) or fewer turns of a larger gauge wire(lower resistance)?.Which coil would loose more to heat?,which coil would produce a stronger magnetic field for the P/in avaliable?.

These are things i already know,and the questions are just to see and help those that may not know the answers to these questions.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #454 on: December 14, 2014, 01:09:19 AM »
OK,i will make it a little clearer.
We are building a pulse motor(lets just say a simple SSG circuit).We are looking for torque and inductive kickback collection.We are useing a 12 volt battery as our P/in sorce,with a limit of 250mA for I/in. Our air core coil formers are of a fixed size.

So what we want to know is-->what would be better ,lots of turns of a smaller gauge wire(higher resistance) or fewer turns of a larger gauge wire(lower resistance)?.Which coil would loose more to heat?,which coil would produce a stronger magnetic field for the P/in avaliable?.

These are things i already know,and the questions are just to see and help those that may not know the answers to these questions.
What are you relying on to limit the current to 250mA?  If it is the winding and you would not saturate any magnetics at 250mA times the number of turns, then you would design your winding for 12V/250mA = 48 Ohms.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #455 on: December 14, 2014, 01:27:07 AM »
What are you relying on to limit the current to 250mA?  If it is the winding and you would not saturate any magnetics at 250mA times the number of turns, then you would design your winding for 12V/250mA = 48 Ohms.

You know what-forget it Mark.
Contrary to belief,rocket science is really quite simple.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #456 on: December 14, 2014, 05:24:52 AM »

Btw,Lenz effect can be delayed or slowed down... :o ;) 8)...yep, i know already...it's not true...lol
Cheers
Indeed TJ,but there are many here that will disagree. The fact is that not only can it be delayed,it can be completely reversed so as to add torque to the prime mover. The proof is in the fact that an electromagnetic field dose have a speed limit--it dose take some time to develope,as the speed is not infinite. Man has done many test to confirm the speed of light,but what about the speed of a magnetic field?-is it faster than the speed of light,or slower ???. One little hint is that if we apply a heavy load(low resistance) to the inductive kickback of an inductor when it becomes open circuit,the magnetic field around that inductor will collap's slower than if we applied a lite high resistive load to the inductive kickback.

Now-here is a question.
Dose the magnetic field invert when the inductor becomes open,and a load is applied to the inductive kickback,or dose it remain the same field orientation. Is it the voltage polarity of that inductor that determonds the magnetic field orientation,or the direction of current flow through that inductor?.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #457 on: December 14, 2014, 06:22:52 AM »
I'm saying magnetic loops.
Everything is a magnetic loop. :D

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #458 on: December 14, 2014, 08:08:02 AM »
What is your take in regards to coil resistance MH. Is it better to have a coil of high resistance(many turns of small wire),or a coil with low resistance(few turns with a larger gauge wire)?. We will say our pulse motor will be useing a 12 volt power supply for the P/in.Our coils will be of the air core type. What coil would produce more losses in an identical setup?.

Resistance is the enemy for a pulse motor drive coil because it represents lost energy as waste heat.  So low resistance is preferable.  If you have few turns with larger gauge wire you have less resistance but a weaker magnetic field compared to more turns for the same current.  It's all a trade off between resistance, the strength of the magnetic field, and the rise time for the current to really start flowing, and nature of the rotor and magnet configuration, etc.  So there is no simple and easy answer.  I can't tell you precisely what will give you more losses in an identical setup.

However, nothing is stopping an experimenter from doing some tests if they want.  You could make some kind of multi-tap coil and try making measurements at different tap settings, etc.

My gut feel is telling me that a lower-resistance lower-turn coil would be better overall.  However, like Mark has mentioned already, with a lower-resistance lower-inductance coil, you would probably have to chop the main drive pulse into a series of shorter pulses to get good push on the rotor with minimum resistive losses.  The shorter pulses are needed to make sure that the current does not get too high.

MileHigh

georgio78

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #459 on: December 14, 2014, 09:52:38 AM »
GUYS WHY HAS THIS THREAD BEEN TAKEN OVER BY PULSE MOTOR CRAP!
THERE IS ANOTHER ONE OR TWO THREADS ALREADY OPEN FOR THAT TOPIC PLEASE DON'T FLOOD THIS TOPIC UNLESS IT HAS SOMETHING CLOSE TO WHAT SYAIR ORIGINALLY POSTED FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!!

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #460 on: December 14, 2014, 10:16:31 AM »
Resistance is the enemy for a pulse motor drive coil because it represents lost energy as waste heat.  So low resistance is preferable.  If you have few turns with larger gauge wire you have less resistance but a weaker magnetic field compared to more turns for the same current.  It's all a trade off between resistance, the strength of the magnetic field, and the rise time for the current to really start flowing, and nature of the rotor and magnet configuration, etc.  So there is no simple and easy answer.  I can't tell you precisely what will give you more losses in an identical setup.

However, nothing is stopping an experimenter from doing some tests if they want.  You could make some kind of multi-tap coil and try making measurements at different tap settings, etc.

My gut feel is telling me that a lower-resistance lower-turn coil would be better overall.  However, like Mark has mentioned already, with a lower-resistance lower-inductance coil, you would probably have to chop the main drive pulse into a series of shorter pulses to get good push on the rotor with minimum resistive losses.  The shorter pulses are needed to make sure that the current does not get too high.

MileHigh
As it turns out for a given magnetic field strength the power loss is theoretically almost completely independent of the wire diameter and resistance.  The loss follows I2*R, but the required I for a given field strength is inversely proportional to the number of turns N.  The number of turns that can be fit into a winding window is inversely proportional to the wire cross-sectional area, and R is proportional to the length of the wire, hence the number of turns and inversely proportional to the area.  In a first approximation where we ignore the proportion of wire area taken up by the insulation:

So:  PLOSS = (K1/N)2*K2*N2 = K12*K2


MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #461 on: December 14, 2014, 10:22:00 AM »
It's my believe and interpretation of what i see wich i never try to impose on the ones asking the questions...it's their decision to decide if they are gonna go with it or not and that's the way it should be... ;)

LOL...you are beating around the bush here... ::)
Pulse motor running at a certain rpm nice and steady with a Mosfet/Hall circuit and when i load it with a coil lenz effect takes place and the drive see that effect...but according to you there are some other things/factors also placing a load on the drive side and that's one of the reasons i see the input increase... ??? ...lol...you are very funny...and it makes no sence to me...lol

Anyway, you have the right to believe what you feel is right and so i do... ;)
Btw,Lenz effect can be delayed or slowed down... :o ;) 8) ...yep, i know already...it's not true...lol
Cheers

There are no "interpretations" or "beliefs" when it comes to trying to understand how a pulse motor works and understanding its performance characteristics.  I am not beating around the bush.  I summarized what I said in two sentences, and if you look back about two pages the detailed reasons are all there explained point by point.  There is nothing funny about it, it's all there if people want to learn and it all makes perfect sense.

No indeed, there no "delayed" or "slowed down" Lenz effect.  If you or Timnan disagree, then you have to back up your statements with examples and analysis.  It's the way the world of electronics works.

MileHigh

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #462 on: December 14, 2014, 10:38:26 AM »
Indeed TJ,but there are many here that will disagree. The fact is that not only can it be delayed,it can be completely reversed so as to add torque to the prime mover. The proof is in the fact that an electromagnetic field dose have a speed limit--it dose take some time to develope,as the speed is not infinite. Man has done many test to confirm the speed of light,but what about the speed of a magnetic field?-is it faster than the speed of light,or slower ??? . One little hint is that if we apply a heavy load(low resistance) to the inductive kickback of an inductor when it becomes open circuit,the magnetic field around that inductor will collap's slower than if we applied a lite high resistive load to the inductive kickback.

Timman, I am surprised at reading this from you, you seem to be all over the map.  You can't take Lenz drag and convert it into Tinman's push!  It doesn't work like that.  Any time you state something radical like that you would have to back it up with some hard experimental evidence.  The "speed of a magnetic field" is the speed of light.

Quote
One little hint is that if we apply a heavy load(low resistance) to the inductive kickback of an inductor when it becomes open circuit,the magnetic field around that inductor will collap's slower than if we applied a lite high resistive load to the inductive kickback.

The slow speed of the collapse of a magnetic field around a coil when discharging through a low resistance load has absolutely nothing to do with the speed of a magnetic field's propagation into 3D space, which is the speed of light.

Quote
Dose the magnetic field invert when the inductor becomes open,and a load is applied to the inductive kickback,or dose it remain the same field orientation. Is it the voltage polarity of that inductor that determonds the magnetic field orientation,or the direction of current flow through that inductor?.

I am really surprised that you wrote the above.  The orientation remains the same, and it has nothing to do with the voltage at all.  It is the direction of current that determines the orientation of the magnetic field.  It's like you are rolling back the clock five years here.  You have to know this stuff by now.

MileHigh

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #463 on: December 14, 2014, 11:03:10 AM »
As it turns out for a given magnetic field strength the power loss is theoretically almost completely independent of the wire diameter and resistance.  The loss follows I2*R, but the required I for a given field strength is inversely proportional to the number of turns N.  The number of turns that can be fit into a winding window is inversely proportional to the wire cross-sectional area, and R is proportional to the length of the wire, hence the number of turns and inversely proportional to the area.  In a first approximation where we ignore the proportion of wire area taken up by the insulation:

So:  PLOSS = (K1/N)2*K2*N2 = K12*K2

Thanks Mark, I kind of suspected that it might be a zero-sum type of game.  So to me that means you are back to a timing issue again.  In other words pick a coil inductance that gives you a magnetic field of a certain strength within a certain amount of time so that you can match it with the attributes of your rotor and the speeds that you want to run at, etc.  I suppose you are always thinking about not overloading the battery either because the battery becomes less efficient at higher current draws.

Here is what would be a good pulse motor competition but I think it's beyond what you will see around here:  I am going to assume at typical true-RMS meter requires a 25 Hz or higher periodic waveform to work properly.  Let's say every participant has to put 3 watts AC into a load resistor with a value of their choice.  This comes from a generator coil and the waveform period has to correspond to 25 Hz or higher.  So the competition would be to build a pulse motor to do that, and the winner is the person that builds the pulse motor that requires the least amount of average input power.  There would have to be near-zero direct coupling between the drive coil(s) and the generator coil and every competitor in the contest would have to prove this.

The other good thing about this competition is that the back-EMF spike from the drive coil is now pretty much useless and of no importance.  So people would have rethink that one-track-mind business about collecting the back-spike into a capacitor.

A good competition where you have to agonize about minimizing your input power for the same output power.  It would be really cool and it's a reflection of the real world where engineers struggle with that issue every day when they design portable electronics devices.

MileHigh

Jimboot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )
« Reply #464 on: December 14, 2014, 11:28:56 AM »
Here's a shot of the latest build. Have to work on the rotor steels next and then the coils