Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.240.18.37; envelope-from=echristley@att.net
Message-ID: <4DDD1C4E.4040804@att.net>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 11:12:14 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@att.net>
Reply-To: echristley@att.net
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100623)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: New impeller design
References: <list-4994114@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-4994114@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Charles Davis wrote:

> Another thought - if the 'ignition' magnet was cast in, say, the top (or left) half of the impeller, then one could cast many magnets in the 'bottom' (or right) half, then have a series of coils wound around formers which would be your alternator - being excited by the full-circle of magnets
> 

I considered that a while back.  Pump power back into the coils, and you could get rid of the starter.  I forget who it 
was (Bill, maybe?), but one list members piped in that he drove a pickup in Germany that had an instant-on starter that 
used a similar setup.  He said it was bulky and heavy.  It was too much development effort for me.  It requires the 
development of electronics, generator design and the high RPM mechanics.  The Harley-Davidson generator is an 
off-the-shelf part, and I just have to build a reliable mount.

I think it would be the ultimate in compactness and weight reduction once the development is done, but the development 
effort is beyond my ability at this point.