Re: am I a SRSG failure?

[FutureT-at-aol-dot-com (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)]

In a message dated 8/9/00 6:48:21 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 
writes:

> before I ever modified it.  
>      What's wrong?  I made sure to make the flats the same width as the 
"dead
>  poles" (which are the width of 3 poles right?)  And they are not off the 
180
>  degree marks either.  I just don't see what is wrong with the flats as far 
> as
>  the examples I used of other modified motors.  Possibly I should mill the 
> flats
>  more?
>   
>  Dave
>  
Dave,

Three questions:  What is the motor horsepower, is a rotor disc 
attached to the motor, and are you sure it's not locked now?
Some folks have a very hard time telling using a flourescent
lamp if the rotor is locked, because the pattern will be fuzzy.
I assume you attached at least a cardboard disc to the motor
with a heavy black or white line drawn across it.  It's helpful
to put the motor on a variac so you can gradually increase
the voltage and see the rotating pattern.... and see when it
locks.... at what voltage, etc.  If you have a heavy rotor disc
attached, it may be loading the motor too much to make it
lock up.  If you variac is the type that goes up to 140 volts,
the 140 volts may help to lock it up also.

I don't use the "width of the dead poles" to modify my motors.
I go by proportion; If the armature is 3 3/8" diameter, the flats
should prpobably be about 1 1/8" wide, in other words the
flat width should be 1/3" the diameter of armature or so, but
it's not really too critical.

I would not say that you are a SRSG failure.... optimism,
persistance, and learning, is the name of the game here    :)

Cheers,
John Freau