Troubleshooting Alternator Wiring

[ecurbruce]

Bob, and Bill,
Thanks for being my sounding board and advice givers!
We got through it, and I am glad to put closure to these two year old questions in my head.
This will work, and possibly something else will work better, but at least I have SOMETHING that works!

Bruce

[ecurbruce]

Bob, to answer some questions left open ended;

" we talked about doing a rewind, but it was JB Collier who actually rewound one and reported about it. "

____ I had-NOT gotten you two guys' alt.projects confused at all, (as I well recall the different-approaches [for alt.modification] that you each took).

__ My related-inquiry was-not concerning a completed rewind-job, but rather-actually a 6-pole stator-core with it's power-coils stripped of wire-windings, with the INTENT of being rewound.
So wasn't that YOU,, who had done-so, with such intent ?

Yes, I have another stator that's stripped bare and could be rewound if I had some of the plastic bobbins to wind onto, and I seem to recall a little discussion between the two of us regarding rewinding that stator... Maybe we should have been more serious about it, huh?

____ While I do recall NOW, I had forgotten about your developed-dedication to the parallel-configuration, and naturally had assumed that you once/ORIGINALLY were likely one of those (in the overwhelming majority) who always think the same (misleading!) 'basics' much-as the writer of the mag.article -(that 6+6v must = 12v -bs.), and-so HAD expected to go-with the (more commonly-done) 'SERIES' arrangement, (back when you very-FIRST got-into modifying your alt.stator, [before your first-ever post] ).
(I'm glad to learn that at-least YOU seem to have been lifted-out of the murk of high-school 'basics' !)
__ And also, yes I do indeed (fairly-well) recall YOUR over-enthusiasm for the (so-labeled) 'scheme-E' that MotoMike hastily came-up with for Bill to try-out, (as well as my feeble-attempt to discourage any consideration of actually adopting that rather bare circuit-arrangement into any permanent-use).
I'm fairly-sure that Mike thought of that-circuit with the presumption of it being rather-naturally equally-balanced. _ But that CAN'T actually be counted-on !
IF both alt.power-windings were actually EQUALLY-matched, THEN it would be no-problem to directly-combine them-both together in that bare-fashion.

This comes from my " six coil alternator in a narrow case 250"

To clarify, I never intended to express that all coils would be wired in series, rather that there are two series circuits to work with. I feel for the same reasons, there is not much advantage to the center tap wiring version with two wire sizes.
I wonder though, with one set of coils of large wire, one set of coils of small wire, isolated from eachother, exit the alternator separtely, each of the four wires run through a diode, then each circuit conected to a regulator/rectifier in parallel and out of phase. (My plan always has a regulator) The small wire circuit would charge at low rpm, the large wire circuit would then kick in at higher rpm. Is this sound reasoning, or am I way off base?

Here is where I began to develop the parallel concept (or at least present it to the forum...) based on what I know from automotive alternator design. This is long before MotoMike introduced his "E scheme".

Here is your reply, Bob,

____ Other than your next new alt.cable containing two pairs of wire-leads, (one pair for each alt.winding-circuit), I don't really follow your circuit-plan reasoning (as worded).

No surprise, you rarely understand my verbage and terminology, through no fault of your own...


There is another passage where I presented to Bill Corey for testing the parallel configuration well before Motomike presented it as the 5th configuration and became "Mike's E".
It'll take some searching to find that one!

Bruce.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= ecurbruce ...
" Bob, to answer some questions left open ended; "

____ Thanks, your considerate-thought is appreciated !
____ I hope you don't mine the slight alteration-change that I've done to your post (solely for the apparent purpose of bringing some obvious-organization, to clearly separate WHO had wrote what).




" Yes, I have another stator that's stripped bare and could be rewound if I had some of the plastic bobbins to wind onto, "

____ I had thought-so !
So what happened to the rest of it ?



" and I seem to recall a little discussion between the two of us regarding rewinding that stator... Maybe we should have been more serious about it, huh? "

____ Would you still be interested in doing that, (as you once were), so as to come-up with an ultimate alt.stator which employs ALL the best features possible ? - (I've got two different plans for such.)



" This comes from my " six coil alternator in a narrow case 250"
Here is where I began to develop the parallel concept (or at least present it to the forum...)
This is long before MotoMike introduced his "E scheme". "

____ At the time, I think I had assumed that Mike-himself had thought-of that "E" arrangement all on his own, but it's rather quite possible that he just wanted Bill to get-around to trying-out your original proposed arrangement.
In any case, it's quite certain that it was actually first YOU who had originally conceived that particular/(scheme-E type) connection-arrangement !




" Here is your reply, Bob,
`
No surprise, you rarely understand my verbage and terminology, through no fault of your own... "

____ Actually, it's the reverse of that Bruce... I RARELY don't fully understand your post-wording !
__ I recall that my specific-reply was in attempt to get you to post a reworded-version of it all, so that I could then be more sure of exactly-what you had actually meant-to convey.
Here follows the parts that I wasn't clear on...

with one set of coils of large wire, one set of coils of small wire, isolated from eachother, exit the alternator separtely, each of the four wires run through a diode, then each circuit conected to a regulator/rectifier in parallel and out of phase.

Specifically, I don't-get the part with the "diode", or the part about "out of phase". ...
What's the intended-purpose of the 'diode' ? _ And, if you directly connected the two separate alt.winding-circuits together in parallel AND 'out-of-phase', then you'd obtain the 'mad-dog' short-circuit which you just recently discovered ! _ (But even if PROPERLY phase-aligned, the two DIFFERENT windings would be GROSSLY mismatched [for being directly-combined] !)
Also unclear, is whether you had actually meant four 'diodes' or just one, and-also, two 'regulator/rectifiers' or just one !?
__ So with those multiple-optional thought-pathways all still left-running through your mind, please reread your-own quoted-wording and then try to clear-up exactly what's meant to be what.
Next...

The small wire circuit would charge at low rpm, the large wire circuit would then kick in at higher rpm. Is this sound reasoning, or am I way off base?

____ Not totally "sound reasoning", no. ...
As both those circuits would both contribute at ALL RPMs, all the time ! ...
At some very-low RPM-range, the thinner-gauged stator-winding (presumably with a resulting greater-number of coil-turns), would be able to charge the battery whilst (at the same-time) the larger-gauged stator-winding (with less coil-turns) would-NOT then be able to.
But at any RPM, (and of-course more-so at higher-revs),, whenever the load-system is drawing high-current, the larger-gauged winding would be better enabled to cope with the high current-draw (than the thinner-gauged one), without getting heated-up as much (due-to it's lower resistance/impedance) ! _ The larger-gauged winding would-not be as strong at keeping the battery charged, but conversely it would naturally be BETTER at having it's power transferred-TO the intended-load (rather than absorbing a greater-share of it's-own power, itself, [like the thinner-gauged winding is naturally more apt to-do) !
So, whenever the load-system is drawing high-current, the larger-gauged winding would become the one that gets MORE-taxed, thus relaxing the duty on the thinner-gauged winding, (because the larger-gauged one would thusly supply the greater-share of the total consumed-power).
__ So I-myself can see a possible advantage of having BOTH gauged windings within one alt.unit (in a motor that's more-apt to be run at low-RPMs). _ (BUT, the two [overly different !] stator-windings could-NOT be connected-up directly-together !)
____ (And indeed, [after having been inspired by suchly wound Jap.bike-stators], I-myself came-up with such a multiple-advantaged 6-pole stator !)



" There is another passage where I presented to Bill Corey for testing the parallel configuration well before Motomike presented it as the 5th configuration and became "Mike's E".

____ Evidently it would seem that YOU quite more-so than Mike, deserve the credit for first conceiving that (rather simplex) parallel arrangement !
(I know I sure wouldn't want to have any credit for it though !)


____ Looking-forward to your next follow-up posting !
__ (Bill's too !)


Enlightening-Cheers,
-Bob

[wcorey]

As has been the case lately, I just have time to read some new content here
before running off to work, with little/no time for a thought out reply.
Have a 60+ mile commute each way...

I'm very much interested in continuing this discussion,
I may get some answers I need that kept me from going forward in the old thread.
Later on I'll hopefully join back in...

If you guy's want the history on your present topic, try starting with Bruce's post about half way down
on page three and a some on page four. It's pretty relevant to the current topic.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=556&hilit=alternator+modifications&start=20

Bruce did indeed introduce the series/parallel concept but just as in the beginning of this thread,
it had no output for being backwards. lol. Seems like case case of 'stator dyslexia'

That was also where I got stuck on the 'cancelling effect' thing...

May also have been the beginning of the 'co-induction effect'...

Here's a 'teaser' to get you both interested...

Postby wcorey » Sun May 22, 2011 1:17 am

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

[ecurbruce]

Bill, that's the first thing that popped into my mind when I found no output from my alternator, and realized I'd swapped the wires- even before I started this thread... It's like I forcast it somehow, huh


Bob, here's some thoughts;
Bob, concerning rewinding a stator, I don't have enough parts left to accomplish that one. That stator is the one I dissected to see how the coils were wound. It was a damaged stator that was un-useable, which is why it was a good candidate for dissection. I would need six plastic bobbins to do that rewind, but I think it would be a fun project. I have access to copper winding wire in ALL sizes here locally, so that would not be a problem.


____ Actually, it's the reverse of that Bruce... I RARELY don't fully understand your post-wording !
__ I recall that my specific-reply was in attempt to get you to post a reworded-version of it all, so that I could then be more sure of exactly-what you had actually meant-to convey.

Yes, sounds right, that's why you're the writer, and I'm just a tinker


Bob says;"Specifically, I don't-get the part with the "diode", or the part about "out of phase". ...
What's the intended-purpose of the 'diode' ? _ And, if you directly connected the two separate alt.winding-circuits together in parallel AND 'out-of-phase', then you'd obtain the 'mad-dog' short-circuit which you just recently discovered !
Also unclear, is whether you had actually meant four 'diodes' or just one, and-also, two 'regulator/rectifiers' or just one !? "

The out of phase part, I guess the unique way that the Ducati stator is wound took care of that part.
About the diodes, I was thinking one diode for each of the four wires exiting the stator, to eliminate any feedback and keep current flowing out of the stator. not sure how sound that was either, just an idea.
There's a device I saw somewhere that's a ring of diodes all pointing the same direction, I think you would attach a stator lead between diodes around this ring, and off of this ring comes off the AC input to the regulator. I may be completely wrong and off base on this device, I would have to go back and research that one, but it seems the Volkswagon alternator is built that way??? Maybe this was my inspiration when I mentioned doides in the beginning???

Bob says;" ____ Not totally "sound reasoning", no. ...

Yea, quite true, plenty of not so sound reasoning in there, so we all contributed to find something solid instead. The things I wrote were all just tinkering ideas, a point to start at...


Bob says;"____ Evidently it would seem that YOU quite more-so than Mike, deserve the credit for first conceiving that (rather simplex) parallel arrangement !
(I know I sure wouldn't want any credit for it though !)

Only because you asked if I started out thinking about a series connection... I've long past the opportunity to take credit for the parallel configuration and passed on it. . It became "Mike's E", after all.


By the way did you see my entry at the very top of page 5 here?

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= ecurbruce ...
" It was a damaged stator that was un-useable, which is why it was a good candidate for dissection. "

____ Well that was a rather fortunate circumstance, cuz I had always wanted to tear-down a 6-pole stator to learn what you had discovered, but never found it important enough to do so with any of the good-conditioned units I had.



" I think it would be a fun project. "

____ I have a couple of spare stators of which I suppose I could donate one providing that you're really serious enough to follow-through.



" I have access to copper winding wire in ALL sizes here locally, so that would not be a problem. "

____ Do you still have the original coil/winding-wire laying-around ?
I believe any rewind-project would prefer/require thinner-gauged wire so as to achieve an increased number of loop-turns per power-coil.



" The out of phase part, I guess the unique way that the Ducati stator is wound took care of that part. "

____ Well even-so, things still don't seem to be sensibly adding-up...
The only thing that's rather unique about the Ducati-stator, is that it has a 'pair' of windings wound in a dual-arrangement,, otherwise it's opposite-ends are normally/naturally out-of-phase, just like regular/standard alt.stators are.
So I'm still unclear on what you HAD thought.
__ I think we may need to simplify concerns of polarity-arrangement when dealing with concepts of winging-arrangements, as I know that such would've helped clear-up some things that we've already gone-through.
I've been thinking of using battery-cells to represent phase/polarity matters, (such as for clearly indicating a mad-dog short-circuit, etc).
Do you think that would help make things more obviously clear for you ?



" About the diodes, I was thinking one diode for each of the four wires exiting the stator, to eliminate any feedback and keep current flowing out of the stator. "

____ It would be quite helpful to see a diagram-scheme proposed showing how all the diodes would be oriented, in order to determine exactly-what effect they'd provide.
I'm thinking that while just 2-pairs could isolate the two windings's outputs from each-other, they'd then also prevent full-wave rectification of either winding by the included R-R.unit.



" Only because you asked if I started out thinking about a series connection... "

____ Well, it has seemed to me that most-EVERYBODY has only thought-of or promoted just the 'series' arrangement, and-so I'm not use-to anyone-else thinking that a parallel-arrangement makes good-sense. _ (Even well above-average minds [such-as MotoMike & DucWiz] have promoted the quite rather common-conception as accepted & promoted by that posted mag.article.)
So I just had to assume that you as-well had once started-out in that same (large) boat, (as even I-myself once had !).



" By the way did you see my entry at the very top of page 5 here? "

____ If you're referring-to the FIRST-post on this-page, then yes/of-course I did,,
I just didn't note anything within it, calling-for any response.
Did I miss-something ?


Enlightening-Cheers,
-Bob

[ducwiz]

Hi all,

a very interesting thread, but too difficult for me to contribute because of the "special" language often used. English is not my native tongue, I learnt the british version in school, and now practice it at my place of work, with people from all over the world, but not from the US or UK. Occasionalk holidays in the UK are not sufficient, anyhow.
Understanding especially DCT-Bob's contibutions often is a real challenge for me. Bob, please forgive not to follow your calling to join this thread. But be sure - I like this forum a lot, we have nothing like this in Germany - maybe due to the low number of n/c singles here.

cheers Hans

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= ducwiz ...
" but too difficult for me to contribute because of the "special" language often used. "

____ That's somewhat fairly-disappointing, Hans !
I've had high-hopes for you (in particular) to come-to understand Ducati electrical-workings even better than myself !



" English is not my native tongue, "

____ Well I don't-think that anyone could ever tell-so, (as it's so very-well done !). _ But even-so, Hans,, your use of written English-wording has been fairly-well ABOVE average, even for those who's native-tongue has been 'English' for all their lives !
And-thus, your well-written posts have been extra-much appreciated !



" Understanding especially DCT-Bob's contibutions often is a real challenge for me. "

____ I don't understand how that could possibly be, as I go to extra-lengths to help make my worded-English easier for foreigners to comprehend correctly.
But even if my extra-clarified writing-style still fails to be sensibly understood, then I'm always glad to further elaborate on any statement I've ever posted ! _ So if there's ANYTHING I've ever written that you'd like to have explained again in other-words, then I'd be HAPPY to do-so for you Hans !
And I'm also glad to help you grasp ANY wording I've ever used, so as to help increase your conception of 'English' ! ... (For instance... just as YOU had recently used the term: "crowbar circuit" [and explained it],, I-myself had recently stated: "mad-dog short-circuit", which was expected to lead readers to imagine a crazed-dog wildly-spinning after it's-own tail. _ So if you ever need such added-detail explained, you now ought realize that I'm more than willing to do-so [for ANYone !].)



" Bob, please forgive not to follow your calling to join this thread. "

____ Well Hans, OF-COURSE you're forgiven in any case, (even-though you had no-need to feel such concern as that, in the first-place) !
__ I understand that you may-not wish to offer any opinion TO this thread, but could you not at-least contribute through 'inquiry' -(asking questions) ?
Often after I've placed a post, I become disappointed that no-one asked any questions about anything that the post should've inspired.
People like you & I may-not actually NEED to ask something for our OWN benefit, but we do realize what needs to be asked for the sake of those who didn't realize what needs to be asked. _ (I'm sure that at-least YOU understand what I mean by that.)
So If you ever realize anything that's worthy of being asked about,, then please post the question, if even only for the benefit of OTHERS.
(That is, IF you ever care to take the time to do-so.)


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[ecurbruce]

Hans, I will say I too would like to hear anything you have to say- experience or opinion on this thread and any other subject. I'm always learning from others!

Bob says;"
____ I have a couple of spare stators of which I suppose I could donate one providing that you're really serious enough to follow-through.
____ Do you still have the original coil/winding-wire laying-around ?
I believe any rewind-project would prefer/require thinner-gauged wire so as to achieve an increased number of loop-turns per power-coil.

So I dug out the stator remains, and what I have left is one small bobbin, with one inner winding remaining on it, and one larger bobbin, bare and useable. Then I have the bare laminated stator core from a narrow case.
Another narrow case stator with two small bobbins and two larger bobbins would complete the makings of a six pole six coil stator
As I said there remains one inner coil on a bobbin, so I have that much original wire left ( to compare new smaller gauge wire too?).

We would have to sort out some conceptual details and agree on a direction to proceed, would this alternator be something I would use on my 250 NC monza?

I have a battery, a regulator-( not apposed to getting that mosfet shindegeren reg, though.) Headlamp, the-brighter-the-better,(currently 60 watt), tail lamp and brake lamp-1157 style LED, so saves some current there, electronic ignition- coil resistance is 3 ohm, I want to test the ignition to see how much current it draws.

I know you strive for a balanced system, are into splitting alternator outputs for differing tasks, then what other goals would you strive to achieve?

Would we continue this in this thread, or should we create a new one?

Bruce.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= ecurbruce ...
" Another narrow case stator with two small bobbins and two larger bobbins would complete the makings of a six pole six coil stator "

____ Then it seems we have the makings for a complete puzzle.



" I have that much original wire left ( to compare new smaller gauge wire too?). "

____ Yes, right... It would be fairly important to have the original-wire compared to whatever replacement gauges are available to you.
__ Also, you'd have-to experiment (physically) with the available smaller-sizes to help determine the (later chosen) wire's convenient-fit around the bobbins.



" We would have to sort out some conceptual details and agree on a direction to proceed, "

____ I'm afraid I have only two conceptual-options I'd require, to choose from. _ But I am open to other optional conceptions for such a project.
__ My-own favorite plan -(plan-A), would call-for two pairs of bobbins to each be continuously-wound with one gauge-size thinner than the stock-gauge,, and depending on what's available, the third pair would be continuously wound with a wire-gauge that's two or three gauge-sizes thinner.
__ My 'plan-B' would be to wind all three pairs with a gauge-size that's two sizes thinner than stock.
__ Normally, thinner gauged wire is-NOT desirable because it's naturally increased resistance leads-to a greater-portion of the produced power being wasted by the stator (instead of being more available for the load-system). _ BUT, since the three pair/sections will be connected-up in 'PARALLEL', that then much reduces the stator's OVERALL-impedance, and hopefully thus end-up with LESS overall-impedance, so that a greater-portion of the produced power is then rather available for consumption by the load-system.
The need for a thinner gauge is because we wish to stuff-in as much wire-LENGTH as possible, because that's THE-factor that provides increased tension & greater power-production !
(I rather hope that the above info leads-to related questions.)



" would this alternator be something I would use on my 250 NC monza? "

____ Don't you have any other DUKEs ?
__ I'm inspired to go-through with the proposed project with great-hopes that Bill would be at-least willing to perform his test-work on the resulted stator. _ As it wouldn't be a very revealing project without comparing output to that which Bill has already done !



" I have a
Headlamp, (currently 60 watt), "

____ I thought I recall that your-own alt.project was inspired due-to wishing to fully power a 'Z.bulb' ?



" I know you strive for a balanced system, "

____ Yes, for myself that is. _ But this project's aim is rather towards achieving the most MAXIMUM-power that can possibly be had with the stock 6-pole stator-core & rotor !



" are into splitting alternator outputs for differing tasks, "

____ But in THIS-case, the sole/main-strive is merely to keep the battery charged along-with driving as powerful lighting as you deem reasonably desirable.



" then what other goals would you strive to achieve? "

____ Right now, I can't think of any,, can you ?



" Would we continue this in this thread, or should we create a new one? "

____ Another dedicated thread would certainly be sensible,, but until the project has actually gotten underway, any further discussion ought-to continue within THIS thread.


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob