Return-Path: Received: from email2k3.itlnet.net ([64.19.112.12] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c2) with ESMTP id 760087 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 22:35:05 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.19.112.12; envelope-from=jwvoto@itlnet.net Received: from rav.itlnet.net (unverified [192.168.10.149]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with SMTP id for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:34:21 -0600 Received: from JWVOTO (unverified [64.19.115.65]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with SMTP id for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:34:20 -0600 Message-ID: <002601c51bb4$8a8d33a0$41731340@JWVOTO> From: "Wendell Voto" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Racemate alt/water pump Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:37:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001F_01C51B82.26BDD280" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C51B82.26BDD280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Racemate alt/water pump > That's why I'm interested in this PM generator. Looks nearly 100% = bullet=20 > proof, especially with redundant rectifiers and regulators isolated = with=20 > switches from the coils (at which point the switches become the weak = link). >=20 > It appeared to me the primary mechanical failure would be the mags,=20 > unless some resonant frequncy could break off the stators or coils. >=20 > Finn >=20 > Ernest Christley wrote: >=20 > > Finn Lassen wrote: > > > >> I was looking for possible failure modes. We know that alternators=20 > >> fail. What would be the possible fairure modes of this PM generator = -=20 > >> other than rectifiers, and series voltage regulator? > >> Alternators failures: rectifiers, bearings, brushes, ? > >> The envisioned PM generator would have which possible mechanical=20 > >> failure modes? > >> > >> Finn > >> > > -No bearings. In fact, if installed properly, no moving parts (at=20 > > least in the sense that parts are rubbing against one another). The = > > stator bolts to something solid and doesn't (shouldn't) move = relative=20 > > to the mounting. The rotor bolts to a shaft and doesn't (shouldn't) = > > move relative to the mounting. > >> > > > In the final analysis, the PM alternator is just a simpler design = that=20 > > does the job very well. Standard alternators were made more=20 > > complicated due to the operating environment, and along with that=20 > > complexity comes a list of failure modes. Even though the modern=20 > > alternator is very robust, it'd be nice to leave that list on the = ground. > I haven't chimed in on this yet (was down in Texas for 3 days and had = 288 messages to go thru).Looks inviting to not need the belted alt. = However, if you cruise at 4500RPM will it still put out adequate = voltage. Someone mentioned that at a 6000 RPM cruise the output would = only then be sufficient to supply the load and charge the bat. Wendell ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C51B82.26BDD280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Racemate alt/water pump

> That's why I'm interested in this PM generator. Looks nearly = 100%=20 bullet
> proof, especially with redundant rectifiers and = regulators=20 isolated with
> switches from the coils (at which point the = switches=20 become the weak link).
>
> It appeared to me the primary = mechanical=20 failure would be the mags,
> unless some resonant frequncy could = break=20 off the stators or coils.
>
> Finn
>
> Ernest=20 Christley wrote:
>
> > Finn Lassen wrote:
> = >
>=20 >> I was looking for possible failure modes. We know that = alternators=20
> >> fail. What would be the possible fairure modes of this = PM=20 generator -
> >> other than rectifiers, and series voltage=20 regulator?
> >> Alternators failures: rectifiers, bearings, = brushes,=20 ?
> >> The envisioned PM generator would have which possible = mechanical
> >> failure modes?
> >>
> = >>=20 Finn
> >>
> > -No bearings.  In fact, if = installed=20 properly, no moving parts (at
> > least in the sense that = parts are=20 rubbing against one another).  The
> > stator bolts to = something=20 solid and doesn't (shouldn't) move relative
> > to the = mounting. =20 The rotor bolts to a shaft and doesn't (shouldn't)
> > move = relative=20 to the mounting.
> >> >
> > In the final = analysis, the=20 PM alternator is just a simpler design that
> > does the job = very=20 well.  Standard alternators were made more
> > = complicated due to=20 the operating environment, and along with that
> > complexity=20 comes  a list of failure modes.  Even though the modern =
> >=20 alternator is very robust, it'd be nice to leave that list on the=20 ground.
> I haven't chimed in on this yet = (was down in=20 Texas for 3 days and had 288 messages to go thru).Looks inviting to not = need the=20 belted alt. However, if you cruise at 4500RPM will it still put out = adequate=20 voltage.  Someone mentioned that at a 6000 RPM cruise the output = would only=20 then be sufficient to supply the load and charge the bat.
Wendell
------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C51B82.26BDD280--