n-c alternator modifications: discussion and testing

[DewCatTea-Bob]

"

I've put together a 3 ohm load and generated new single winding test data with it. I tried both a parallel and ('normal' and alternate) series connection scheme (and posted the results of the series schemes in cryptic photo form which no one seemed to notice ). "

____ Huh, I haven't seen it ! _ What page (of what thread) is it on ??

Hah! that was a test to see if anyone was really following what I was doing and to see if I was making sense. I think with the high traffic it was overlooked by everyone.
The post was on page 11, right after the very first set of pics. I put up the pics (of a setup that was being discussed at the time) with only rpm to see if anyone would look at them and be able to discern exactly what was going on by using my description of the setup from the previous post. It still may be useful info.

No one took the bait...

It was in response to this request from you and Bruce;

" run the jumper between 1 and 3, and connect to the rectifier 2 and 4. It's still series,
Will it make a difference? "

____ Perhaps both you & Bill had missed that I had already suspected that Bill may have already done so inadvertently (if all 4 of his wire-leads are the same color).

The following is what I posted, and it's still a test keep in mind that the wiring colors are from the original scheme/description (testing done at 2 ohm)

These pics will give me an indication if my previous post was intelligible and yes, I'm playing games...

At 3450 rpm;



Also at 3450 rpm;



Bill

____ This response-post is to Bill's May,24-6:49PM posting.....
__ Bill, I had seen that older post (with it's 2 pix) not too long after you had posted it. _ I-myself was creating the new intended dedicated-thread, and after I saw your 8th & 9th pictures, I moved them other to be presented with the first 7-pix.
When I first seen that (follow-up)- post of yours, I didn't understand it since it had no text explaining what the 2 included pictures were about, and since your pictures (as YOU post them) have their right-hand sides cut-off (at least with Firefox), I couldn't see the whole setup intended to be depicted (even if I bothered to try) !
So this is my-own excuse.
I'm sure all your pictures are quite worth-while, it's just that I-myself have been unable to make any use of them (yet).
__ Of course I sure would've liked to have seen the measured result figures asap !


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

____ This is Bill's posting from May,24-6:50PM.....

Here's the revised setup with some standard test data to go along with it.
Bob, you can use it to add to the new thread as you see fit.

The two standard output wires from the stator (1 and 2) are the black cord , with a black and a white conductor.
The added wires (3 and 4, formerly grounded to the stator core when in stock form) are the yellow ones (one has a black stripe). (all coming out of the alternator at 8 o'clock and draped over the grey motor)
The other end of the black wire (through it's set of coils/windings) is yellow/black.
The white wire (coil/winding set) has the plain yellow on it's other end.
(since 1,2,3 and 4 aren't color coded on the drawing, the two pairs are interchangeable in my descriptions)

The black wire has an orange jumper connection,
the white has a yellow jumper,
the yellow has grey
and the black/yellow has purple.

In summary, the orange and purple are two opposite ends of one set of windings, yellow and grey are the other set.

When looking at the photo's, it should be possible to determine the stator wiring scheme by the colors and placement, as well as the test data results by the meter outputs.
It may even be possible to determine rpm by whether or not the belt can be seen on the grey motor (top left in most pics), belt on, 6k rpm, belt off, 3450 rpm.
Loads are tougher, as the resistor values and connection scheme can't be seen, the big green one is 1 ohm and the stack of 4 flat brown ones is 3 ohm.
Values reported are rounded to the nearest single decimal point.


single winding, 3 ohm, 3450 rpm, 2.8a, 14.7vac, 11.2vdc

single winding, 3 ohm, 6k rpm, 4.8a, 24.7vac, 19vdc

both windings, series, 3 ohm, 3450 rpm, 3.8a, 19.1vac, 15vdc

both windings, series, 3 ohm, 6k rpm, 4.7a, 23.3vac, 18.6vdc


Bill

____ So Bill, this post doesn't seem to clarify (with wording) exactly what's been done to get your listed results...
Are these tests done with the alt.windings having their power-outputs merely 'half-wave' rectified, or just what's the difference (from your past tests) ??
____ Regardless, thanks for the additional test-data !
After it's cleared-up what scheme these results are in regards to, I'll then go-over the meaning of whats what, (as I've done with your other data).


Thanks,
-Bob

[MotoMike]

Bob wrote:
Well Yes & No... 'Yes', the alt.designer must be in consideration of all related voltages, but 'No', he can't do much to directly control the particular 'voltage' of the alternator itself, cuz alternators don't really produce 'voltage' (or 'amperage') all on it's own... as alternators only produce power-juice that's measured in 'wattage', and it's actually the external electrical-components (in circuit with the alternator) that are responsible for what cause voltage & current to be derived from the 'wattage' output of the alternator. _ (Which is just one reason why I say people should think in terms of 'wattage' [rather than voltage or current].)

MM
Bob, I'd have to disagree with this statement. the permanant magnet rotor induces voltage accross the windings of the stator. That voltage is present accross the ouput of the stator even if no current path exists. If a path is provided cause current will flow. That current flow through loads will cause power to be consumed at each load measured in watts, which are added to determine total load. And if unloaded, that potential accross the stator is considered by some to be the correct definition of EMF. Voltage is the driver and where it begins.

And since the difference of potential that we call voltage is the reason that current flows, I would agree with Bill that you won't start charging the battery until the rectified voltage output of the alternator exceeds the voltage of the battery. anything less while the bike is running and the battery is dischaging running the system.

[MotoMike]

Is it the third photo down on page 15?

You got it. Did I do it right?

I think you did as that is what I expected that circuit to produce. bringing the D cell analogy back to play, it is akin to taking two batteries in series and putting the positive terminals together. their voltage will add togethe 1.5+ plus 1.5- to produce zero.

Bill

[MotoMike]

My 60 watt NC alternator with simple stator coil un-earthing and linking alteration produces over 14volts under load and keeps my battery charged even with lights on , It would be nice if someone could test this settup to see what is actually availiable .I think this is what most of us need.(14 pages of gobbledygook and i'm none the wiser), I do try to keep the revs over 3k as it is better for the big end, a 35 watt HL is fitted,but but 50w would be better,I expect that would leave me stranded in the backwoods though.

Bob
I am with you on trying to keep it straight and what it means. Hopefully someone will distill it into a concise paper. I was thinking originally that the series connected unearthed alternator was a simple conversion that would make switching to 12v a snap. Then our earlier readings caused me to doubt that thought. Now it appears to me that if we don't get too load heavy, it will work, but if loaded to heavily it will not. With the stator arranged in parallel it appears it can produce more wattage, but with a typical load, not enough voltage to keep a 12 volt system charged. These are my observations and no doubt there may be "some" who will disagree.

I think if under the same circumstances that you are getting 14 volts loaded, you were to swap in the 55w headlight, And monitor voltage again through the rpm range you would see if your fears are correct. I would love to know the answer to that question. An unloaded 12 volt battery should be over 13, so as Bill has said, 14 plus would be a good point to consider. I say under the same circumstances as your previous test because you want to use the same battery state so that your regulator doesn't skew your readings. even so it is not really a scientific method, but so long as the check is made contemporaniously or immediately after the other measurment, I would think it should answer the question. I'd see if the rpm required was equal to or less than where I rode most of the time, if so you are probably ok.

[wcorey]

When I first seen that (follow-up)- post of yours, I didn't understand it since it had no text explaining what the 2 included pictures were about, and since your pictures (as YOU post them) have their right-hand sides cut-off (at least with Firefox), I couldn't see the whole setup intended to be depicted (even if I bothered to try) !

Oops, I guess I'm relying too heavily on the photos, assuming that ultimately all the pertinent info is contained within. I've done so many test runs that at this point I can glance at a pic and know just what test was done. I'm not writing anything down as the tests are done, as I myself use the pics as record of the results (along with the file name to some degree). The reason for the 'cryptic post'/'test' was to see if everyone 'got it' and since there was no response I thought it might have been ok, guess I was too vague with my intent and should've spelled it out more obviously. I would certainly like to hear from anyone else who is having issues interpreting the data from the info I'm providing.

Not sure why my pics are being cut off by your browser, I also run firefox and everything looks fine, maybe because I have a wide ratio monitor. Though I seem to remember early on seeing cut off pics here, it hasn't been an issue for quite some time, don't know/remember what changed. Personally I really don't like the new format with the small clickable pics, I want to read the text and see the pic at the same time, not one or the other. Also with multiple pics I like to just scroll though a thread and not have to go back and forth, clicking for each pic. Is there an option for doing this that I'm missing?
I guess another reason I link the pics from photobucket is habit from other forums I'm on where this practice is encouraged to conserve server storage space.

Are these tests done with the alt.windings having their power-outputs merely 'half-wave' rectified, or just what's the difference (from your past tests) ??

They're just duplicates of tests already done, re-done for the purpose of standardization with the new wiring color scheme and are all full wave rectification. Now that I understand the basic concept of the half wave setup I should be able to figure it out without the drawings but it would still be good to have them 'for the record' (with wire colors, rpm, all three meters and actual load too). My goal here is that each pic, combined with it's corresponding drawing, would contain all the relevant info of that test. I'm sure you guy's would prefer it all on one page on a nice spread sheet done on exel. Any volunteers....?

" My next step there will probably be in figuring out how to down rate the outputs a bit. "

____ You mean cut-down the power-output of those modern alternators ? _ If so, a power-diode should do.

Man o' man..., really struggling to keep up with all the directions this thread is branching off to, so much good stuff.

Bearing in mind that the 'the modern stuff' puts out substantial heat as a standalone unit with no load or R/R, I believe I need to down rate the unit itself to have much impact. A side benefit would be that I'd imagine a 350 watt stator down rated to 120 watts would be fairly bulletproof. The most non-technical method (good for me) would be to increase the gap between rotor and stator, logistically difficult in that the only way to do it, is to match oddball stator/rotor combinations with the 'right' (it's unknown what gap is required) diameters and numbers of magnets/coils. The more technical (not good for me, would be blind hit or miss) approach could be something along the lines of bypassing whole coils or to partially remove windings (partial lobotomy). I've even thought of attempting to partially demagnetize a rotor but this seems like it would be difficult to control without sophisticated equipment and was unsuccessful in finding someone else (professionally) who could do it.

Bill

[ecurbruce]

Concerning;"Today is the day ...alternator anatomy(page 15)-
Update... The smaller coil assemblies are wound clockwise, oposite of the larger coil assemblies.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

From MotoMike's post of May,25-2:16PM, (on previous page)...

" Bob, I'd have to disagree with this statement. "

____ Mike, that which you actually "have to disagree with", is your-own misinterpretation of what my wording had actually meant to state ! - (Which is understandable for anyone who doesn't realize the difference between 'voltage' & 'potential'.)
I did-NOT state that a running alternator doesn't produce 'potential', (as it most-certainly has to !),, but rather, I merely meant to indicate that it can't produce any particular 'voltage', all on it's own (without being connected to a circuit).
__ (When persons read wording which seems to be contrary to that which they believe is known fact, then they ought consider that they've likely misinterpreted what they've read,, before going-ahead & proclaiming that they "disagree" with it !)


" the permanant magnet rotor induces voltage accross the windings of the stator. That voltage is present accross the ouput of the stator even if no current path exists. If a path is provided cause current will flow. That current flow through loads will cause power to be consumed at each load measured in watts, which are added to determine total load. And if unloaded, that potential accross the stator is considered by some to be the correct definition of EMF. Voltage is the driver and where it begins. "

____ Of course Mike, I don't disagree with any of that (since I understand what you really mean when you type "voltage", instead of 'potential'), however I ought be glad that you've made me realize that my own used wording didn't succeed to precisely state only that which I had meant for it to, (& also not clearly more-so than that which YOU interpreted it to say).
I have now added (minimal) wording to that post/statement of mine, so as to help prevent such deviation (from intended thought-line).
__ I should point-out that I (for one) don't believe that the words 'potential' & 'voltage' are fully interchangeable, as (it seems to me) that YOU seem to think.
I certainly agree that there's 'POTENTIAL-voltage', but it's not actual 'voltage' until it's measured/calculated (into units called: 'volts'). _ And even an extremely high voltage potential can instantly fall-down to being next to non-existent (without a back-up supply of electrons to hold it up [as 'voltage'], [which together with 'current' becomes 'wattage']).
Mike, I'm just saying that 'Potential' -(as potential-voltage) and 'Voltage' (as 'volts'), are not the very-same concept, (quite two different aspects actually !). _ As 'voltage' by itself is truly a one-dimensional entity, (thus non-existent), all on it's very-own !
__ Now do you disagree with this too Mike ? _ (If so, please think carefully before you do, and keep in mind that even a volt-meter passes 'current' to get a volt-reading !)


" And since the difference of potential that we call voltage is the reason that current flows, I would agree with Bill that you won't start charging the battery until the rectified voltage output of the alternator exceeds the voltage of the battery. anything less while the bike is running and the battery is dischaging running the system. "

____ Why do you feel the need to make the point that you agree with Bill on that ? _ As that's of course so very true, that ANYone should understand it -(that it takes a higher voltage to charge that of a lower voltage).
Did I state something else that you did not understand correctly (as I had actually meant) ?
____ Since you brought this up as well, here's another thing for you to (possibly) disagree with...
I claim that even a power-source with over 100 potential-volts (or even measured volts), can be useless for charging a 12-volt battery, (without a store of electrons to supply a 'current') ! _ Cuz 'voltage' alone itself, can-not exist, (outside of your "instant of time" concept), without 'current' (thus wattage), to back-it-up. _ Only "potential" -(the ASSUMPTION of voltage !) exists ! _ And not 'voltage' alone ! _ As (conception of) 'voltage' truly does-not exist until it's measured/calculated as such, in 'Volts'. _ (And thus the reason for the term 'potential' !!)
So, 'potential', (simply measurable as 'voltage'), IS (more so) "the driver and where it begins", (as you've put it).


____ (As they say... Put all that in your pipe & smoke it.)


Fun-Cheers,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

Did I do it right?

I think you did as that is what I expected that circuit to produce. bringing the D cell analogy back to play, it is akin to taking two batteries in series and putting the positive terminals together. their voltage will add togethe 1.5+ plus 1.5- to produce zero.

____ I have yet to check that out myself but, the results actually should not have canceled-out to exactly "zero", (like two exactly equal-state D-cell would), because the two separate alt.windings had been seeming to be of UNequal power-outputs. _ Thus I would've expected the outcome to be (roughly) the difference of the two.


Dukaddy-DUKEs,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

By: wcorey...
" Not sure why my pics are being cut off by your browser, I also run firefox and everything looks fine, maybe because I have a wide ratio monitor. Though I seem to remember early on seeing cut off pics here, it hasn't been an issue for quite some time, don't know/remember what changed. "

____ Are you running the very latest version of Firefox (which has been available for only about two weeks) ? _ I always resist accepting their newest versions (as soon as they come-out), because while they include something new (which I'm getting along without), they often also LOOSE something I'm used to having !
If their nest version will fix the cut-off issue, I'll update to the new 4.0 version.


" Personally I really don't like the new format with the small clickable pics, I want to read the text and see the pic at the same time, not one or the other. "

____ I agree with you Bill ! _ I also preferred the older pic.posting setup we had here before. _ I guess Jim & Tony figured the nice advantage (of clicking to enlarge) outweighed any lost advantage. _ Too bad both methods aren't combined !


" Also with multiple pics I like to just scroll though a thread and not have to go back and forth, clicking for each pic. Is there an option for doing this that I'm missing? "

____ I agree it's too bad that the w.site's method doesn't seem to allow for insertion of pictures within the posted-text.
Also I gather that Tony figured-out (for Jim) how to switch between the two (known) pic.posting method/features, and it's not something other than Jim is permitted to do.

.
" They're just duplicates of tests already done, re-done for the purpose of standardization with the new wiring color scheme and are all full wave rectification. "

____ That just fine Bill, it's not only better to have the testing presented better, but as a side-benefit we get confirmation of the test figures !


" Now that I understand the basic concept of the half wave setup I should be able to figure it out without the drawings but it would still be good to have them 'for the record' (with wire colors, rpm, all three meters and actual load too)."

____ But of course...
And I'll post the other two (as yet unposted) 'series' setup scheme-drawings on this post. _ But it would be difficult to color the wires with leader-stripes along with their main-colors (yellow, orange, purple, & gray), but after you've confirmed the colors as correct, then I'll add that feature to the dedicated thread.
" My goal here is that each pic, combined with it's corresponding drawing, would contain all the relevant info of that test. I'm sure you guy's would prefer it all on one page on a nice spread sheet done on exel. Any volunteers....?


" Bearing in mind that the 'the modern stuff' puts out substantial heat as a standalone unit with no load or R/R, I believe I need to down rate the unit itself to have much impact. A side benefit would be that I'd imagine a 350 watt stator down rated to 120 watts would be fairly bulletproof. "

____ Of course this other stuff better belongs in the thread in which you've already started this simi.side-topic.
__ While the idea of using a rotor that's slightly too large, would take you towards your desired (lowered-power) goal, before being thus concerned, simply try a high-current power-diode in series with the main/common, (or separate diodes for each of the individual outputs), alt.output wire-lead, thus cutting the total output by one-half, (or 1/3rd, if you use two diodes - one diode on each of two [of the 3] individual alt.wire-leads, of a 3-phase setup).
With the single power-diode on the main-common alt.wire-lead, the entire alternator's
output would be merely half-wave, (thus the opposite half-wave is ignored along with half the power).
And with a 3-phase setup, each of the three individual outputs could be selected separately (instead of the main-common), for cutting-down overall-power by just 1/6th (with 1-diode), or 2/6ths (with two separate diodes).


Fun-Cheers,
-Bob