Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Fossil Fuel Free
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-14-2014, 05:04 AM   #1451 (permalink)
Permanent Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: norcal oosae
Posts: 523
Thanks: 351
Thanked 312 Times in 214 Posts
Paul:

I was digging through some boxes of stuff I have and found this:

http://www.beisensors.com/pdfs/L25-o...al-encoder.pdf

It's a sooooper high precision (2540 cycles/turn) encoder.

It's got a 1/4" shaft with a flat on it, so it doesn't really meet your motor's requirements, but if we could figure out a way to connect it, it may work.

Does the motor have a shaft out the back?

- E*clipse

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-14-2014, 08:13 AM   #1452 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 180
Thanks: 13
Thanked 81 Times in 52 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by e*clipse View Post
Paul:

I was digging through some boxes of stuff I have and found this:

http://www.beisensors.com/pdfs/L25-o...al-encoder.pdf

It's a sooooper high precision (2540 cycles/turn) encoder.

It's got a 1/4" shaft with a flat on it, so it doesn't really meet your motor's requirements, but if we could figure out a way to connect it, it may work.

Does the motor have a shaft out the back?

- E*clipse
Why don't you guys use the flywheel and a reluctance sensor as an encoder? That would cut a significant portion of the costs.



The input capture peripheral and a free running timer can be used to measure the time between each pulse

Last edited by cts_casemod; 12-14-2014 at 08:21 AM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to cts_casemod For This Useful Post:
e*clipse (12-14-2014)
Old 12-14-2014, 10:12 AM   #1453 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 180
Thanks: 13
Thanked 81 Times in 52 Posts
Time to use some brain cells folks

I'm designing an algorithm for the induction motor.

Ok, everyone knows that above nameplate speed the V/Hz ratio and the torque start to fall, but exactly by how much I cant find.

I thought about using the HP formula HP = (torque(nm)*Speed(RPM))/5252 but assuming the V/Hz ratio goes down, so does the slip induced current on the rotor, so I would have to increase the slip to have a constant secondary output. Problem is such functions are often not linear.

I cant really find any good source that discusses this on the field weakening region. Any ideas?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 11:29 AM   #1454 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
P-hack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408

awesomer - '04 Toyota prius
Thanks: 102
Thanked 252 Times in 204 Posts
I took a second to look at heubners code, basically you set fweak to the field weakining frequency, it is also the point where max dynamic range is at (i.e. full svpwm). After that you can only increase frequency without increasing v (and still have a sinewave). so field weakening is constant v with increasing hz. I didn't see anything fancy about slip at that point.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 11:41 AM   #1455 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 180
Thanks: 13
Thanked 81 Times in 52 Posts
Thats just what the literature tells you. But from that you cant calculate the torque.

let me clarify:

Theory says that torque falls by the square of the voltage, so technically at twice the nameplate speed one would have 25% torque as the V/Hz ratio has now fallen to 50%.

Some sources disagrees and state that you'll have half of the torque, since the horsepower is constant. Clearly something is not right here. How can you have the same horsepower if the torque has fallen to 25 and the speed has doubled!? Perhaps one could double the slip, which makes a lot of sense, but this is never mentioned in technical papers.

The idea is to keep the rotor power constant. For that, if the motor is operating at half the V/Hz ratio, one doubles the rotor frequency, by increasing the slip.
The net result would in fact be constant torque, since the primary V/Hz ratio and hence the flux has fallen to 1/2, but the rotor flux is kept constant, but I haven't found any sources mentioning anything about the slip, so for the time being, this is just me putting 2+2 together.

Adding to the problem is how reluctance will play here. Not only the V/Hz ratio is increasing, but the impedance of the motor (XL) is also increasing. More impedance = less current.

Last edited by cts_casemod; 12-14-2014 at 12:25 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to cts_casemod For This Useful Post:
e*clipse (12-14-2014)
Old 12-14-2014, 01:09 PM   #1456 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 180
Thanks: 13
Thanked 81 Times in 52 Posts
I wrote the formulas for all that and calculated the table below

Parameters are:
Motor nominal Voltage: 208VAC
Motor nominal Frequency: 50Hz
Motor rated Slip: 70RPM
Battery cut out voltage: 320VDC



Notice how having a variable slip, with the aim of keeping rotor power constant above nameplate, can attain a larger output torque. There was a topic on DIY car forums where we discussed this 2 years ago.

Last edited by cts_casemod; 12-14-2014 at 01:22 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cts_casemod For This Useful Post:
e*clipse (12-14-2014), thingstodo (12-14-2014)
Old 12-14-2014, 01:30 PM   #1457 (permalink)
Permanent Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: norcal oosae
Posts: 523
Thanks: 351
Thanked 312 Times in 214 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cts_casemod View Post
Why don't you guys use the flywheel and a reluctance sensor as an encoder? That would cut a significant portion of the costs.



The input capture peripheral and a free running timer can be used to measure the time between each pulse
Funny - that's what I woke up thinking may work! I think it would work great for Paul's induction motor; after all they require slip, so an accurate position isn't necessary - right?

OTOH, accurate position is very helpful for PM motors; and that's the current issue.

Soooo, the idea is to take the encoder off the induction motor he has and make it work on the PM motor he just got. The reluctance encoder could be set up for the induction motor. I think it's a great set of experiments.

Paul- if you'd like to try this, I'll machine an adapter for the different motor shaft diameter.

- E*clipse
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:43 PM   #1458 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 180
Thanks: 13
Thanked 81 Times in 52 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by e*clipse View Post
Funny - that's what I woke up thinking may work! I think it would work great for Paul's induction motor; after all they require slip, so an accurate position isn't necessary - right?

OTOH, accurate position is very helpful for PM motors; and that's the current issue.

Soooo, the idea is to take the encoder off the induction motor he has and make it work on the PM motor he just got. The reluctance encoder could be set up for the induction motor. I think it's a great set of experiments.

Paul- if you'd like to try this, I'll machine an adapter for the different motor shaft diameter.

- E*clipse
For PM, I believe If one were to weld two teeth of the crankshaft together the longer pulse could be used as zero point to synchronize the timer. Thats similar to what conventional vehicle engines use (petrol/gas).

From there just count the number of pulses to find the angle.

If possible, a IR or hall sensor will avoid magnetization noise, while reading down to very low speeds.

For me it was not an option since I didn't had space to install the encoder.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 01:57 PM   #1459 (permalink)
Permanent Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: norcal oosae
Posts: 523
Thanks: 351
Thanked 312 Times in 214 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cts_casemod View Post
Thats just what the literature tells you. But from that you cant calculate the torque.

let me clarify:

Theory says that torque falls by the square of the voltage, so technically at twice the nameplate speed one would have 25% torque as the V/Hz ratio has now fallen to 50%.

Some sources disagrees and state that you'll have half of the torque, since the horsepower is constant. Clearly something is not right here. How can you have the same horsepower if the torque has fallen to 25 and the speed has doubled!? Perhaps one could double the slip, which makes a lot of sense, but this is never mentioned in technical papers.

The idea is to keep the rotor power constant. For that, if the motor is operating at half the V/Hz ratio, one doubles the rotor frequency, by increasing the slip.
The net result would in fact be constant torque, since the primary V/Hz ratio and hence the flux has fallen to 1/2, but the rotor flux is kept constant, but I haven't found any sources mentioning anything about the slip, so for the time being, this is just me putting 2+2 together.

Adding to the problem is how reluctance will play here. Not only the V/Hz ratio is increasing, but the impedance of the motor (XL) is also increasing. More impedance = less current.
I have a similar question relating the output power of a motor, related to the bus voltage. The reason I'm wondering about this is because I would like to know how the motor's performance is compromised - and not just top speed - if the bus voltage is reduced. This will be a significant help in my battery calculations.

Theory says P = IV. Great, so if we hold current constant, we should get a simple linear reduction in power if we linearly reduce voltage - right? Where this seems to fall apart is exactly where it should be textbook easy. If you're lucky, the motor supplier or controller supplier will provide a torque - speed curve based on a voltage. They may even provide a power - speed curve as well.

For my motor, I'm relying on the data produced by ORNL's testing of the 2010 Prius. For the Prius motor, the torque output is pretty much linearly ( in fact about 1:1 ) related to current. In the region before the base speed, torque output is constant. BEMF has little to do with this because it's almost negligable at low speed - about 10V or 20V at 500rpm. Additionally, they did all these tests at the same switching frequency (5kHz) and used their own inverter so they knew inverter output wouldn't affect the data.
Motor stator resistance is very low ( about 0.7 Ohms L-N ) and the inductance is fairly low at about 1mH. ( Ld and Lq are different - I can't find exact numbers) For all the tests, efficiency was in the 90% range.

Now for the strange part:
At 650Vbus, the torque output is 200Nm from 0 to about 2000 rpm.
At 500Vbus, the torque output is 150Nm from 0 to about 2000 rpm.
At 225Vbus, the torque output is 120Nm from 0 to about 1000 rpm.

This is not linear. Any suggestions about what is going on?

-E*clipse
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2014, 06:57 PM   #1460 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
P-hack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408

awesomer - '04 Toyota prius
Thanks: 102
Thanked 252 Times in 204 Posts
@cs, not really sure what the problem is there I guess. More slip is more torque, up to the breakdown torque. Slip above or below rated slip has worse power factor. Is all that taken into consideration in your tables?




  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Paul & Sabrina's cheap DIY 144v motor controller MPaulHolmes Open ReVolt: open source DC motor controller 7377 11-12-2022 12:23 PM
Paul & Sabrina's Cheap EV Conversion MPaulHolmes Fossil Fuel Free 542 11-12-2016 10:09 PM
Contest! Name Paul & Sabrina's controller MetroMPG Forum News & Feedback 120 10-22-2011 02:59 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com