View Single Post
Old 09-29-2015, 12:27 PM   #2101 (permalink)
thingstodo
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saskatoon, canada
Posts: 1,479

ChargE (not yet running) - '92 Mazda MX6 LX
90 day: 33.89 mpg (US)

Ford Prefect - '18 Ford F150 XLT XTR
Thanks: 746
Thanked 543 Times in 438 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by e*clipse View Post
Just wondering - after looking at the 3rd drawing in that patent again. The positive goes into one phase (lower right in the drawing) and then returns through the other two. Perhaps it would be possible to modulate the other two so that there would be zero torque?? It would require good knowledge of motor position when parked, and the goal would be opposite of FOC's goal. That would make a converter that uses a BLDC motor for the inductor possible. Also - the inductance of my motor is very low - about 1.4mH.
If you were to modulate the two phases that are not connected to the bridge, I think that you would generate torque (with a Delta motor). Would it make sense to determine the position of the motor and modulate to avoid rotation of the motor (even the little bit of 'slop' in the mechanical linkage, before the car moves)? I think I would rather have the transmission disengaged for this one! Maybe you could alternate between positive and negative rotation and have the motor 'wiggle' a bit ... not perfect!

With a Y connected motor I think it would be harder to prevent rotation. You'd have to turn on both phases, time proportional to the existing motor position, to create torque in both directions .. to cancel each other out .. .. I don't even like it while I'm typing!

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to thingstodo For This Useful Post:
e*clipse (09-29-2015)