n-c alternator modifications: discussion and testing

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" I for one would welcome a fresh thread to start again in, go for it at your discretion. "

____ With this considerably more professional 'new-beginning', how could we possibly be content to leave it here !?
I'll see about creating an appropriately titled thread and move this over to it, asap.


" I get .5 ohm across 1 and 3, .6 ohm across 2 and 4. No reading across 1and 2 or 3 and 4 "

____ Then it seems that your stator is in proper condition, and thus still useful for the testing-work.


Fun-Cheers,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

__ To get the 'half-wave' output-power for testing, you can simply use your FW.bridge-block by ignoring it's AC-inputs, and simply wire-up your (series-type circuit) to it's Plus & Minus terminals, (which will incidentally maintain the two-diode voltage-drop, as before).

I don't understand this... wouldn't you have to use one ac input on the rectifier?

____ Doing that would be okay too, but then you'd be making use of only one diode...
Using a single diode would keep your circuit as simple as possible but I figure your existing rect.block is already handy & up to the needed current-handling capacity.
By connecting the entire rect.block (as I've suggested) just makes continued use of it simple, as it's then doing same as if one BIG diode. - (As circuit-wise, there's two parallel diode-pairs -[consisting of 2 diodes in series].) _ So the rect.block's 4 diodes are doing that which one diode alone would do, anyhow.

__ I am a bit concerned that your load is only "1" watt,

You may want to correct that...

____ Right, I meant 1 'OHM' (not "1 watt") !

I have other large wattage resistors at 3, 5 and 100 ohms if needed.

____ Since Mike has not mentioned any concern about the low resistance of your load-resistor, I'm extra-sure we won't need the 100-ohm option.
If you ever intended to run any test for an extended time-period however, it would then be easier on the power-source if the load's resistance were to be on the higher side.
I think the 3-ohm choice would be best, so long as it can handle over 100-watts.


Fun-Cheers,
-Bob

[MotoMike]

Man a lot to read in the short time I'm away.

Bob
Yep, I'd like to see the half wave set up. but not chief in my search for knowledge. don't want to make too many requests. I'm most curious about the series coil set up and sorting out the mysteries there. Looks to me Bob that Bill's half stator full wave testing may support your earlier conclusions on alternator output.

I think the three ohm load would be better too. 1 ohm after all is not far from a short. I had some where wondered if there was quite a bit of heat from the system loaded like this.

I don't think those Fluke's are true RMS, but they are rms for a sine wave and will work for what we are doing. If you are worried about their calibration, I'd check them on some source both AC and DC and just see if they read the same or close. I bet they are close.

[wcorey]

And also, there's two ways that the two stator-windings could be put in series - either head-to-tail/(tail-to-head), thus taking output from one head & one tail,, OR, head-to-head/(tail-to-tail), thus taking output from two heads (or two tails).

Just for kicks, wire the circuit one more way... run the jumper between 1 and 3, and connect to the rectifier 2 and 4. It's still series,
Will it make a difference?

So using a head-to-head scheme has current flowing in an opposite direction in each set of windings in relation to the other. And using the alternate head-to-tail scheme has the current flowing in the same direction in both winding sets (in relation to each other). It seems apparent that this could have a cancelling effect... and (what effect) in the other?

Does this have a similar effect to reversing the winding direction of one winding set?

How does this tie into why the series wiring between both sets produces less output than either single set?

And how is the stock utilization implemented in parallel using both sets?

Are these even the right questions?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Bill

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" So using a head-to-head scheme has current flowing in an opposite direction in each set of windings in relation to the other. "

____ Well that's what we want to become absolutely certain of. ...
Since your recent test-results didn't produce expected evidence which would've confirmed that the pair of alt.windings are in the same relationship as that of a center-tapped transformer, then the possibility may also exist that the current-flows of the two separate circuits are neither exactly same OR opposite, either way.
(Furthermore, I suspect that the results will be different for DC & AC current-flows.)


" And using the alternate head-to-tail scheme has the current flowing in the same direction in both winding sets (in relation to each other). "

____ Well, that's certainly what would be expected in a normal center-tapped transformer-like winding-setup. - (With results much like putting two D-cells head-to-butt. _ [Unlike the other/opposite case which would be like having two D-cells head-to-head or butt-to-butt].)


" It seems apparent that this could have a cancelling effect... "

____ Yes, (concerning your FIRST scheme-example up-above), a canceling-effect is what WOULD be expected with a normal center-tapped transformer-like circuit-setup !


" and (what effect) in the other? "

____ Well of course pretty-much the same as ought be expected with two D-cells properly faced within a flashlight.
__ However when working with AC / P.DC, seemingly illogical results may occur when current-flows are not exactly 180-degrees out-of-phase or 360-degrees in-phase, or, of unequal amplitude.


" Does this have a similar effect to reversing the winding direction of one winding set? "

____ You're asking if the result of switching the polarity-connections of just ONE stator-winding (in relation to the other), while they are otherwise still kept connected in series-fashion,, would be the same outcome as if the coil-turn direction (of just one of the windings) were to be reversed.
Well the answer to that seems simply 'Yes', if we're talking about DC only.
However, (right now) I'm thinking that AC is probably a different story.


" How does this tie into why the series wiring between both sets produces less output than either single set? "

____ I wish you could ask me for the answer to that, back in the '70s when I still understood it clearly. _ However I believe I recall that it has to do with what's referred to as 'Counter-ElectroMotive-Force'. ...
If that's indeed the case (with your testing), then we should find that the results will indeed be different, depending on whether you're testing with 'AC' (as you only have done, thus far), or just 'DC' (as I have hopes you will).
__ I hope that Mike has some understanding of it as AC may stifle -(counter-motive) it's self, depending on the current-flow through coil-windings which are wound-turned in unlike fashions.


" And how is the stock utilization implemented in parallel using both sets? "

____ That's easy, as the stock-system only allows DC-flow one alt.winding-circuit at a time (WHILE the other happens to be dead, at the same time) !
(And that's to do with why I haven't exactly agreed with Mike that the alternator is exactly the same as a center-tapped transformer.)
There may even be some Push-Push (as opposed to Push-Pull) type effect, as the collapsing flux-field of one DC current-flow, may help push-start the build-up of the DC-pulse of the next current-flow in the other stator-winding. _ (If so, I'd say the stator-designer was really going all-out for his operating-theory.)


" Are these even the right questions? "

____ That's a good question at this point ! _ (As they most all have been!)
I think that they may very well be, but won't know for sure until you duplicate your tests with just DC.


" Inquiring minds want to know... "

____ You got that right Bill !


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[MotoMike]

Series connection.

Been reserving my opinions til we are certain that there is no mix up in the connections. So far the results of the series connected stators are still a mystery to me.

I don't think the term electromotive force and counter electromotive force need to be added into the mix. for most of my training it simply is synonymous with voltage. so in this context it would be in phase and out of phase voltage. voltage is the difference of potential that causes current to flow. EMF is a term Volta came up with to describe the difference of potential that existed across his piles (battery) it is thought by some to be an unfortunate term that sticks with us today because in all most other aspects of physics force denotes a physical application, a pushing or pulling or torsion etc. Some think the term EMF deals specifically with differnce of potential at the unloaded terminals of a source such as a battery.

So far I have assumed that the wave form that existed from the stock system was a series of positive going half wave pulses. If that is true, then the coils must be wound in series or in phase so that when one stator connection is at the max positive the other stator connection is at the max negative. I have forwarded the schematics to a guy who is far more experienced than me and will wait for his thoughts on the subject.

One thing that is niggling away at me is Bills revelation that the alternator heats significantly with no load. since there is no current through the coils in this condition, I am suspecting that it is due to hysteresis heating of the stator cores.

Mike

[MotoMike]

If it turns out that we can't wire the two halves of the stator in series and get twice the output, then a theory occurs to me which is not fully fleshed out. The cause would certainly be from the field caused by the current flow though both coils on a common core at the same time. For the original system to work I am quite sure that the individual coils potentials are in series, to use Bob's d cell analogy, that they are arranged as they would be in an 8 cell flashlight. (must be a cop light). But with two coils sharing a common core, interactions between their field might have some degree of opposition. the designers were not concerned with this as they are only using half of the coils at a time and these interactions won't exist. I need to do some studying on the subject. If there is merrit to this theory, I wonder the effect of operating both halves in parallel? To get the two positives together you would have to connect them out of phase and would our fields then be complementary. Now don't try to pin me down on this, I'm offering it up for discussion. If the effect exists, it would not be experienced in the stock system or in Bills single half tests, because we are not conducting through both halves at the same time.

[ecurbruce]

Mike said "If there is merit to this theory, I wonder the effect of operating both halves in parallel? To get the two positives together you would have to connect them out of phase and would our fields be complementary."

Mike, refer back to my post in "six coil alternator in a narrow case 250", thursday April 28 5:18 AM, this is what I wanted to convey at that point. Each lead would need to run through it's own diode to isolate it.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

By: MotoMike...
" Series connection.
Been reserving my opinions til we are certain that there is no mix up in the connections. "

____ I've also been holding-back from 'volunteering' -(without being asked), since I don't wish to have to come-back & further clarify or correct wording (which may not turn-out to have been relevant),, until after most everything has been ironed-out.


" So far the results of the series connected stators are still a mystery to me. "

____ That would be expected if ya continue to consider the 6-pole alt.stator as same as a normal/standard center-tapped transformer, (which has a continuously-wrapped winding with a third wire-connection 'tapped' somewhere in-between the single-winding's ends).
__ In the past I've not fully contested that notion because I've never un-wound a stock-stator to see just exactly how they had their winding-turns originally 'wound'.
So there still exists the possibility that the two windings which I've maintained are "separate", may not be wound (around the common-core) in the very-same manor.


" I don't think the term electromotive force and counter electromotive force need to be added into the mix. for most of my training it simply is synonymous with voltage. "

____ It's been my understanding that the term 'Counter Electro-Motive Force' is most applicable to power-generators (& motors) which become further ineffective as RPMs build. _ And having to do with power-current & flux-fields becoming out-of-phase enough to no longer work (as would otherwise be expected).
I also figured, (possibly wrongly), that when flux-fields are in opposition, that's also a form of 'counter' electromotive-force (since flux-fields fall-under the term 'electromotive').


" so in this context it would be in phase and out of phase voltage. "

____ Perhaps, but also possibly involved in the related context of our generated flux-field strengths seemingly becoming into opposition.
I say that because Bill's testing-results indicated that when there was no load, (thus no measurable current), each alt.winding's measured 15.6-volts, fully added-up to the expected 31.2v-total (in series).


" Some think the term EMF deals specifically with differnce of potential at the unloaded terminals of a source such as a battery. "

____ I agree that the abbreviation 'EMF' has taken-on considerably further definition than that of the original-meaning of word-phrase it's meant to designate.


" So far I have assumed that the wave form that existed from the stock system was a series of positive going half wave pulses. If that is true, then the coils must be wound in series or in phase so that when one stator connection is at the max positive the other stator connection is at the max negative. "

____ While I wouldn't have chosen that same choice of wording, I believe the thought is correct. _ And Bill's series no-load voltage-output appears to prove it so.


" I have forwarded the schematics to a guy who is far more experienced than me and will wait for his thoughts on the subject. "

____ I don't think you've sent him sufficient data Mike,, as he then ought be in the same boat as us, since he's also uninformed as to the exact winding-setup within the alt.stator.
I'm gathering that he's the type ('above' us) who ought see things as all ways which are actually possible, so I'll be disappointed if he also concludes it to be as a simple 'center-tapped transformer'/full-wave like setup.


" One thing that is niggling away at me is Bills revelation that the alternator heats significantly with no load. "

____ Should only be flux-field interaction, right?

[DewCatTea-Bob]

Second-post By: MotoMike...
" If it turns out that we can't wire the two halves of the stator in series and get twice the output,

____ What did you mean exactly by "output". ...
Bill was not the first to find that the unloaded voltage of each stator-winding will ADD to double, when put in series.
So it seems you must be referring to something else other, such as 'wattage' !?


" then a theory occurs to me which is not fully fleshed out. "

____ I'm glad you're getting that pretty-much independently without me fully reviewing what I 'think', (while waiting for DC.test-work to help narrow it down).


" The cause would certainly be from the field caused by the current flow though both coils on a common core at the same time. "

____ Right, 'AC' current-flow (most likely) however.
And since we must be talking OPPOSING flux-fields during higher AC current-flows, I consider such as falling-under the term 'Counter Electro-Motive Force'. _ (Please correct me if you know of a more specific term for such.)


" For the original system to work I am quite sure that the individual coils potentials are in series, "

____ This doesn't make sensible sense to me, I guess because I'm not sure what you mean by "original system". _ So I can nether agree or disagree -(as I think I want to).


" that they are arranged as they would be in an 8 cell flashlight. "

____ This idea of thinking of the 8 coil-windings - (referring the two separate stator-windings, each wound around the four separate core-coils), as 8 separate flashlight-cells, may become convenient for simplified-explanations.


" But with two coils sharing a common core, interactions between their field might have some degree of opposition. "

____ That's always been a concern of mine, (since way back when I took-note of my own questionable meter-readings), and if that "opposition" is not in reference with regards to counter-electromotive forces, then what exactly is the proper terminology for such opposition, Mike ?


" the designers were not concerned with this as they are only using half of the coils at a time and these interactions won't exist. "

____ That is no doubt certainly the case with the stock (positive DC only, operation) circuit setup, and MAY indeed even remain to be the case with the DC only SERIES operation (which I've requested to be tested).


" If there is merrit to this theory, I wonder the effect of operating both halves in parallel? "

____ Well Mike, 'parallel' operation of both alt.windings is just what I've been claiming that the stock-system actually does, all-along !
__ If you've ever read my old thread-posts on the subject (of stock operation), it seems you've either forgotten, or didn't understand in the first-place !?
____ So to test for the stock output-power (before the regulator-circuit can effect it), we only have to connect the stock-yellow alt.wire-leads to the AC-inputs of a FW-bridge-block, and check the power-output from between the pos.terminal of the rect.block & the two (otherwise grounded) stator-winding lead-ends.
__ NOW Mike, you should finally comprehend my conception of the two alt.windings being in 'parallel', with each half-wave rectified !


" To get the two positives together you would have to connect them out of phase and would our fields then be complementary. "

____ We've already before agreed that they don't really NEED to have to be out-of-phase, (and in fact YOU-yourself claimed that they had to be IN phase, in order to 'add-together', [which I still maintain is not entirely true]).
And my "Push/Push" (previously mentioned) concept, is fully coherent with the two positive output pulses being "complementary".


" If the effect exists, it would not be experienced in the stock system or in Bills single half tests, because we are not conducting through both halves at the same time. "

____ The Counter Electro-motive Force "effect" (as I-myself refer to it), indeed does not come-into-play within the STOCK-system, (since full AC-flow is relegated to merely positive Pulsating-DC) !
However it has yet to be determined whether a test of the resulting 'FULL' P.DC (from both alt.windings TOGETHER, connected in series-fashion), will or won't be likewise effected, as well !


Fun-Cheers,
-Bob