Rotational Field From Two Signals - Confirm

:

rote:

te:

sible, but with just 2

k it would at least turn.

quadrants (you need at least 3 phases@120 degrees, but 4@90 works too).

inuous field rotation. My point was that since you still get patches of mov ing magnetic field it ought to still move, even if it's not a sensible desi gn.

.

ether the 2 quadrant feed could get a motor to turn.

hey'll

ing to

a nice continuously moving field is the sane option, but what we are discu ssing is equivalent to bringing an iron magnet close to the rotor, moving i t 1/4 turn then taking it away. Repeat repeat. Not pretty but with the righ t motor it should result in rotation.

erent

ting

same.

for

eld is

of

esign.

lbeit rather faster. Steps 1,2,3 in the above list are interpreted by the r otor as a moving magnetic field, albeit present only some of the time and o nly moving around part of the circle.

0

ower off and doesn't care where the next moving magnet is, rotation results .

stuck on ones that will quickly spring back.

there before.

The mag field is not moving back & forth. It's switching on, moving in one direction then switching off. Then repeat.

NT

I had a look at the original post and the diagram it points to.

The sequence on it is: +A 0 0 degrees +A +B 45 degrees 0 +B 90 degrees 0 0 stays put, maybe 90 degrees +A 0 0 degrees ....

There is no way to reach the other three quadrants without signals -A and -B instead of the zeroes.

--

-TV

e:

rote:

e, but with just 2

would at least turn.

drants (you need at least 3 phases@120 degrees, but 4@90 works too).

ous field rotation. My point was that since you still get patches of moving magnetic field it ought to still move, even if it's not a sensible design.

ther the 2 quadrant feed could get a motor to turn.

ey'll

ng to

a nice continuously moving field is the sane option, but what we are discu ssing is equivalent to bringing an iron magnet close to the rotor, moving i t 1/4 turn then taking it away. Repeat repeat. Not pretty but with the righ t motor it should result in rotation.

erent

ting

same.

for

eld is

:

of

design.

albeit rather faster. Steps 1,2,3 in the above list are interpreted by the rotor as a moving magnetic field, albeit present only some of the time and only moving around part of the circle.

90

power off and doesn't care where the next moving magnet is, rotation resul ts.

g

be stuck on ones that will quickly spring back.

n there before.

one direction then switching off. Then repeat.

0 0 is not magnetic field staying put, its magnetic field removed. I don't think anyone has suggested this scheme provides any other quadrants .

NT

The angle was not for the field, but the rotor.

--

-TV

But it does *NOT* go all the way around the circle. There isn't even time allotted to cover the remainder of the circle in the "off" time. Not even enough time to make it half way around. The motor, she don't turn.

It only stays put for 45 degrees. There are only four equal-time states.

Exactly.

:

ote:

te:

sensible, but with just 2

hink it would at least turn.

our quadrants (you need at least 3 phases@120 degrees, but 4@90 works too) .

ontinuous field rotation. My point was that since you still get patches of moving magnetic field it ought to still move, even if it's not a sensible d esign.

nts.

whether the 2 quadrant feed could get a motor to turn.

They'll

othing to

rse a nice continuously moving field is the sane option, but what we are di scussing is equivalent to bringing an iron magnet close to the rotor, movin g it 1/4 turn then taking it away. Repeat repeat. Not pretty but with the r ight motor it should result in rotation.

ifferent

llating

he same.

son for

field is

es:

at

st of

r design.

, albeit rather faster. Steps 1,2,3 in the above list are interpreted by th e rotor as a moving magnetic field, albeit present only some of the time an d only moving around part of the circle.

g 90

g power off and doesn't care where the next moving magnet is, rotation resu lts.

ng

be stuck on ones that will quickly spring back.

een there before.

ne direction then switching off. Then repeat.

we've known that from the start haven't we

Rotor behaviour varies greatly according to rotor type, I just accept you'r e not getting it.

NT

You still don't.

Nonsense. You're dense as a brick.

there's no reason for the rotor to move to 45 degree, look at the windings: all 4 pole pieces would be norths (or souths)

--
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software

actually no, left and riught would be souths of off and top and bottom would be norths or off... nothings going to move at all.

--
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software

well that's one way to confirm you're majorly not following this.

and that's just clueless.

The evidence certainly doesn't lie on your side. No need for me to take further part in this one unless I find the necessary bits & time to do a physical demo, which is unlikely atm.

NT

No, I'm not following your insanity.

You're insane.

No, you're as dense as a brick.

Magnetic poles are N and S, not north and south, and the distinction matters. N means _north_seeking_, i.e. the Earth's magnetic north pole is actually an S pole!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
https://hobbs-eo.com