TinMan Generator Research Moderated Topic

[picowatt]

To help resolve the issue, putting a scope on the coil in each case would speak volumes. Guess you posted while I was writing this.

I agree with .99, my eyeballs are not calibrated for arc voltage measurement. 

Tinman, consider repeating your scratch plate test using a scope with (at least) 10X probes connected across the arc.

Recall being a kid and lighting a NE-2 with just a LV battery, some relatively short lengths of hookup wire (clip leads in today's parlance) and an ordinary metal file connected in series.  Scratching one lead across the face of the file produced an on/off pulse train that, in concert with the minimal lead inductance, produced enough voltage to light the NE-2 connected across the small arcs produced.

Connecting an NE-2 between your brush and scratch plate might just light up the NE-2 as well.

PW

[gyulasun]

Hi Luc,

Quote from: tinman on Today at 04:40:59 PM

    You pulsing the coils is very different to using the brushes only,and trying to collect from that.To get any sort of higher end voltage,you would need some really crappy brush/armature contact.

Answer from you: Not sure where you're going with this.


I think Brad means that in order to receive HV spikes from the rotor coils (by using brushes only and no MOSFET switching),  the electrical contact between the brushes and the copper commutators of the rotor would need to be very bad, meaning less frequent contacts.

This would involve less chance for the brushes to short the gaps (because of crappy i.e less frequent contacts), this would result in a higher self inductance for the coils on the rotor hence the collapsing field would be able to make higher amplitude flyback pulses than in the normal brush-commutator contact case when the brushes do short the gaps hence the resulting coil inductance of the rotor can only be smaller than in the crappy contact case.

I think it is okay that there is a difference in pulsing the rotor coils by a MOSFET (while the brushes also work as normally they should)  and by the brushes only (when no MOSFET used).  In the first case the number of interruptions is more frequent than in the case of the brushes only, and can also happen when there are no adjacent segment shortings done by the brushes. 

In case of using the normal brushes only (no MOSFET switch) you can shift the position of one of the brushes a little to insure that segment shorting should only happen at one of the brushes at a time and not simultaniously at both brushes. This way, out of the 8 rotor coils (say there 8 coils in the rotor), always only one of the 8 coils would become shorted instead of two, this latter in case of a normal (symmetrical) brush positioning always happens.  Even so, the use of a MOSFET switch to capture the flyback HV pulse energy in the rotor can be more favorable than in case of the shifted brush position.

Gyula

[tinman]

Brad,

I don't understand the confusion.

First,  fact, any coil will produce flyback when the power source is disconnected, so the rotor coils are not exempted.

Second, my idea to collect the rotor flyback was because the input current is outrageously high when only the rotor coils are connected, so I was trying to lower it by using something that is normally wasted.

Third, if the stator coils are separate from the rotor coils, then why not direct the flyback in them and see if it can assist the rotor.

Forth, it does work and better than I thought so why not consider using it?

Luc

Totally agree Luc.
There is more than one way to skin a cat.

Brad

[synchro1]

Totally agree Luc.
There is more than one way to skin a cat.

Brad

@Luc,

Can shorting the output coil help in combination with directing the rotor flyback to the stator winding in "Tinman's" split stator coil configuration? Could a third commutator help?

[gotoluc]

@ Gyula, thanks for taking the time to explain Brad's post.

You help is always appreciated and I'm sure I speak for many of the researchers you have helped and continue to help.

Luc

@Luc,

Can shorting the output coil help in combination with directing the rotor flyback to the stator winding in "Tinman's" split stator coil configuration? Could a third commutator help?

I don't know as I have not done that yet. I was first trying to understand what was up with the rotor coil and brushes.

In time and experiments it will come

Totally agree Luc.
There is more than one way to skin a cat.

Brad

Glad to hear that!  nothing like testing for our self

The reason I was looking for a way to re-direct rotor flyback to the stator coil was because I though that may be what you were doing. I knew for sure something was up with the rotor coil and brushes.
It's interesting how it turned out

I'll experiment with rotor shorting and see how it compares.

Thanks mate

Luc

For your entertainment
As you will see,current causes the light show from the brushes,not voltage.
Voltage potential will only define as to how large the gap can be before !current! will begin to flow. As the gap between the brush and commutator segment will only be very small,the only a low voltage potential is required for current to flow.High voltage is also not required to see spark fly when hooking a clip lead to a wire as Luc suggested in his video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGMMDBkf1RY

I was busy all day  only noticed this post now

Wow! that's an eye opener

Thanks mate for taking the time to do this video!

I will never look at a spark the same way and I'm sure other also.

Thanks for enlightening me

Luc