2005 ROAR On-Road Carpet Nationals
#961
Tech Lord
iTrader: (3)
About the only thing I think ROAR can do would be to not grant any more races to that track. Since the track is dissolving all ties to ROAR, that becomes moot.
However, the damage to his business from the bad publicity may be a far worse penalty. His local racers may continue to go there, but with RC Madness about an hours drive away, he may lose some of the new customers he's had recently.
However, the damage to his business from the bad publicity may be a far worse penalty. His local racers may continue to go there, but with RC Madness about an hours drive away, he may lose some of the new customers he's had recently.
#963
Tech Addict
iTrader: (1)
I've follow along on this issue a little. Maybe this has been brought, maybe not, but it keeps popping into my head. It looks like motors rules are going to change drastically, or something is. Anyway, what is difference in a prototype brushless motor being allowed and yet the new batteries not being allowed until they are approved? There are some awesome new cells available, seems to me like if a prototype motor is allowed, why not a new battery technology as well.
Is that the correct thinking or am I off base to far? Maybe motors should follow the same suit as batteries and only have a once a year approval time. There has to be some consistancy someplace.
take care
john
Is that the correct thinking or am I off base to far? Maybe motors should follow the same suit as batteries and only have a once a year approval time. There has to be some consistancy someplace.
take care
john
#964
Originally posted by JohnB
I've follow along on this issue a little. Maybe this has been brought, maybe not, but it keeps popping into my head. It looks like motors rules are going to change drastically, or something is. Anyway, what is difference in a prototype brushless motor being allowed and yet the new batteries not being allowed until they are approved? There are some awesome new cells available, seems to me like if a prototype motor is allowed, why not a new battery technology as well.
Is that the correct thinking or am I off base to far? Maybe motors should follow the same suit as batteries and only have a once a year approval time. There has to be some consistancy someplace.
take care
john
I've follow along on this issue a little. Maybe this has been brought, maybe not, but it keeps popping into my head. It looks like motors rules are going to change drastically, or something is. Anyway, what is difference in a prototype brushless motor being allowed and yet the new batteries not being allowed until they are approved? There are some awesome new cells available, seems to me like if a prototype motor is allowed, why not a new battery technology as well.
Is that the correct thinking or am I off base to far? Maybe motors should follow the same suit as batteries and only have a once a year approval time. There has to be some consistancy someplace.
take care
john
Racing cost money. R&D cost money. There's no arguement that anything cost more to "develope" since we'd have nothing if that was the case.
#965
Tech Champion
iTrader: (22)
"So that being allowd now is fine as it's a given disadvantage. But opening up the Brushed motors to allow Y wind. Is that even called out as not legal now???"
I don't think you can Wye wind a DC permanent magnet motor. That requires one end of each winding to meet at a common point. I know in AC motors, that's the neutral, but I'm not sure about the DC brushless. Are brush motors are really even Delta wound? Can you enlighten us?
I don't think you can Wye wind a DC permanent magnet motor. That requires one end of each winding to meet at a common point. I know in AC motors, that's the neutral, but I'm not sure about the DC brushless. Are brush motors are really even Delta wound? Can you enlighten us?
#966
Well, from what I understand it can be done. It's just very complex and creats another set of issues. This is a big reason why they aren't that way now. Reedy Told Bob it tried it a few years back.
Its about the termination of the coils and how the motor operates I think. Delta the wires terminate at the same place, "Y" the terminate on opposite ends. I'm sorry If i'm wrong, but the engineers all left today, So I can't check. But I will on Monday.
Derek's right, we just argue and debate over the hottest topics. Wait until the new bodies and cars a what not.
Have a Nice Weekend Guys. See you on Monday, or a Tamiya on Saturday. I'll be running the same stuff we had at the nats tomorrow.
Its about the termination of the coils and how the motor operates I think. Delta the wires terminate at the same place, "Y" the terminate on opposite ends. I'm sorry If i'm wrong, but the engineers all left today, So I can't check. But I will on Monday.
Derek's right, we just argue and debate over the hottest topics. Wait until the new bodies and cars a what not.
Have a Nice Weekend Guys. See you on Monday, or a Tamiya on Saturday. I'll be running the same stuff we had at the nats tomorrow.
Last edited by Charlie; 03-25-2005 at 04:42 PM.
#967
Tech Elite
iTrader: (6)
Or both be Delta, Delta is considered the "slower" right?
I think it would be a good idea to open up the rules on brushed AND brushless motors. seems a little bit silly that the last people entering the brushless market are the ones to write the rules (sorry charlie, but it is true). Plettenberg, Aveox, Lehner, Hacker, Kontronik, Mega, and many others have been making motors for almost a decade (or longer). I know it is all aobut who submitts what, but it seems narrow minded or ROAR or any other ruling body to only look at one design. Isn't it this that has held brushed back? Why make the same mistake again?
I think allowing brushed motor builders to experiement with different size armatures, better magnets, and other factors would be a good idea. If nothing else, even out the playing field, delta wound for both, rare earth for both and the same pricing. Although having brushless be more expensive really isn't as bad because you don't have to buy a comm lathe ($150-$???). Brushless has a high initial cost, but very little wear and tear costs. Brushed you have to buy brushes, comm lathe, new armatures, etc. If you were to buy enough brushed motors to keep my sedan running as long as my lehner has, you would have spent well over $1,000 by now (over 3 years old). My lehner has been in my tc3, e-maxx, t3, blizzard, xx4, xxx4, bj4, raising storm, my CRC 6-pack on 6 cells (ever seen a 1/12th do a wheelie???), and several other cars. It has been run on 6, 7, 8, 10, and 12 cells and after all of that the bearings feel a little bit worn but still good for many more hours of use. I can't imagine how many brushed motors I would have gone though, especially at the higher cell counts.
5 or 7 segment arms would decrease brush wear and improve power and reliability....
Allowing 4 and 6 pole brushless would also be a good thing to do. having the coils pulling in pairs on opposite sides of a motor make for a very powerful, smooth running motor. It also helps sensorless controllers acquire rotor position better.
After thinking about it for a few minutes I think I know how a wye wound brushed is possible. If I see this correctly each coil would attach to a comm plate and to a common point. when current flows through the motor it would go from comm plate, through the coil, to the common point, up backwards though the next coil and up to the next comm plate. I may have to try this tonight and see if it works. It would be done to an existing motor aramature I believe. I don't know what the advantages would be.
#968
Tech Elite
iTrader: (6)
I just got done wrapping a wye wound brushed and it does work. I didn't spend a lot fo time working on it so it's performance probably will not be good (I used recycled wire and an old armature blank). But, it can be done and it does work.
http://www.rcpics.net/view_single.php?medid=52600
http://www.rcpics.net/view_single.php?medid=52601
I will have to get better materials to do the next one.
Almost forgot, it is a 10.5 turn which would be like an 18 turn delta wound.
http://www.rcpics.net/view_single.php?medid=52600
http://www.rcpics.net/view_single.php?medid=52601
I will have to get better materials to do the next one.
Almost forgot, it is a 10.5 turn which would be like an 18 turn delta wound.
#970
There's a good reason IFMAR, EFRA and ROAR went for "Wye/Y wind only" for brushless motors...
-> it is more in line with brushed motors power and powerband wise.
-> it's better to have "brushed motor characteristic" with a wye wind due to different feedback to the controller.
-> Delta would offer WAY too much power in brushless with the 05 size motors we use.
@Charlie: Wye isn't able to make as much power as Delta, it's something like 50-60% less power output with a similar wind (they'll always differ by a minimum of 0.5turns...), if I remember correctly. Luckily I wasn't the designer of our brushless system...
Also in case someone doesn't know: wye winds are always 0.5 winds (because of the opposite common connection) while delta's are even winds.
-> it is more in line with brushed motors power and powerband wise.
-> it's better to have "brushed motor characteristic" with a wye wind due to different feedback to the controller.
-> Delta would offer WAY too much power in brushless with the 05 size motors we use.
@Charlie: Wye isn't able to make as much power as Delta, it's something like 50-60% less power output with a similar wind (they'll always differ by a minimum of 0.5turns...), if I remember correctly. Luckily I wasn't the designer of our brushless system...
Also in case someone doesn't know: wye winds are always 0.5 winds (because of the opposite common connection) while delta's are even winds.
#971
Well, There you have it. Thanks Reto.
Also, Kufman... Thanks and I tend to agree with your statements about the rules, but really it's all about who took action. All of the "governing bodies" would have been more then happy to sweep this topic under the rug. So someone had to step up and start swinging.
Nothing will ever be perfect, but the basic rules we have right now are looking to make for a very competive year. We'll have to see. Theoretically brushless should always be faster and more efficient no matter what, I think the idea is to try to keep them Basically the same. If this year proves that brsuhless will out run everything (wich I don't think is the case yet), I'm sure changes can be made for next season. In the big scheme of things, this effects each racer at one or two major events. For club racing rules are rarely followed correctly anyway.
Thanks
Charlie
Also, Kufman... Thanks and I tend to agree with your statements about the rules, but really it's all about who took action. All of the "governing bodies" would have been more then happy to sweep this topic under the rug. So someone had to step up and start swinging.
Nothing will ever be perfect, but the basic rules we have right now are looking to make for a very competive year. We'll have to see. Theoretically brushless should always be faster and more efficient no matter what, I think the idea is to try to keep them Basically the same. If this year proves that brsuhless will out run everything (wich I don't think is the case yet), I'm sure changes can be made for next season. In the big scheme of things, this effects each racer at one or two major events. For club racing rules are rarely followed correctly anyway.
Thanks
Charlie
#972
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
anybody want to see more pictures?
starting with 71 to 199 although I might have got some dups in there
http://www.nashrcracer.com/2005roarnats/roarnats71.htm
and a race report from my views on what happen that weekend.
http://www.nashrcracer.com/2005roarnats/roarnats000.htm
starting with 71 to 199 although I might have got some dups in there
http://www.nashrcracer.com/2005roarnats/roarnats71.htm
and a race report from my views on what happen that weekend.
http://www.nashrcracer.com/2005roarnats/roarnats000.htm
#973
Tech Elite
Nash - thank you. Interesting reading
Dawn
Dawn
#974
Tech Elite
iTrader: (32)
Very nice recap Nash and great photos.
Just to clarify and answer a question you raised within the ROAR section of your recap. You stated: "I though you the racer was responsible for your laps being missed if you had a personal and then again all protests need to be lodged 30 minutes after the finish of the heat or main that you have a disagreement with. Someone tell me where this is in the rule book so I don’t go miss quoting something like others have."
This is not 100% accurate. Under the ROAR guidlines, section 5.6.2. 2nd to last sentence: "The driver is responsible for ensuring that the correct transponder is fitted to the vechicle, or that the correct personal transponder number has been entered in the scoring program".
Earlier in the same section. "If a transponder fails the scorekeeper should make an effort to hand count as accurate lap record".
And Yes, the protest filed at the nationals was within the alloted period of time.
Just to clarify and answer a question you raised within the ROAR section of your recap. You stated: "I though you the racer was responsible for your laps being missed if you had a personal and then again all protests need to be lodged 30 minutes after the finish of the heat or main that you have a disagreement with. Someone tell me where this is in the rule book so I don’t go miss quoting something like others have."
This is not 100% accurate. Under the ROAR guidlines, section 5.6.2. 2nd to last sentence: "The driver is responsible for ensuring that the correct transponder is fitted to the vechicle, or that the correct personal transponder number has been entered in the scoring program".
Earlier in the same section. "If a transponder fails the scorekeeper should make an effort to hand count as accurate lap record".
And Yes, the protest filed at the nationals was within the alloted period of time.