[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: better sync motor mods (tests)



Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>

In a message dated 1/10/01 11:45:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
tesla-at-pupman-dot-com writes:

> It would have been better to make a 
>  3/4" flat cut first, then deepen it to form the concavity.

(adding to my post)
Actually,  I should have made the first cut flat and only maybe
3/8" wide, then deepened it, then widened it, etc, until the torque
peaked, then started to fall off.  It seems quite possible that the
slot, V cut, or concavity, does help the overall torque, by leaving
a wider uncut area in place, whilst still achieving the needed 
depth of cut.  My original thinking was that the cut for a 3600
rpm motor should be wider than for an 1800 rpm motor.  But that
may be incorrect.  

Another point.  There is no fear nor danger of ruining the motor
when making these new types of cuts, because there is no need
to cut any deeper than would have normally been done anyway.

I forgot to mention it (just implied it).... but I did not cut all the 
way through the conductor bars.  

The initial motor start up seemed a little slow.  These new cuts
may weaken the initial start-up, but this is not confirmed.

John Freau

>  
>  But this test suggests to me that a rather narrow cut may
>  be good, or maybe even best, but I can't be sure.  I don't know
>  if the concave aspect is making it better or worse.  Bottom line;
>  it's interesting... but more tests are needed.
>  
>  Question;  has anyone made their flats only 1/3rd the rotor diameter
>  for a 3600 rpm motor, and did it work fine?
>  
>  John Freau