26 replies to this topic

[Mark Onofri]

The first photo is courtesy of Ram enginamneerin. The second one comes by the way of Simco Products.
Like I said, maybe it's just me but....🧐 .... Take a close look at the stack numbers and the Corresponding com pole letters 🔎

[Mark Onofri]

DUH 🙄,
On the top is the Ram engineering,Simko on the bottom 👍
It's just the three (3) pole,I think 🤔

Attached Images

• 
• 

[Bill from NH]

The timing appears to be different.

[Racer36]

Pretty difficult to give an informed answer without knowing the orientation of the brush gear and the intended direction of rotation.

[Clyde Romero]

timing is everything. 

[Mark Onofri]

Well...., not quite. Guys, take another look at the three (3) pole drawings.
Billnh, I learned how to tie my shoes from the five (5) pole drawings. (Hmmm, Velcro isn't looking so bad after all).

[Mark Onofri]

Anyone?

[Eddie Fleming]

Makes no difference what you call them They could have been XYZ. The only thing that matters is the wire routing. The two drawings are routed the same.

 

If there is something else then I am missing it. 

[Mark Onofri]

So what your saying is:
The A terminal in the top drawing is interchangeable with the B terminal in the lower drawing?

[Bill from NH]

The RAM sketch could mean each bank was wound with a separate wire then they were pigtailed together at the tail end. I don't have the arms, I didn't draw the sketches. If I was going to wind, I'd use the SIMCO sketch.

[Eddie Fleming]

So what your saying is:
The A terminal in the top drawing is interchangeable with the B terminal in the lower drawing?

Well kind of.

 

What I am saying is the labels A,B,C only matter if you are using instructions for winding that are related to that drawing. It would be the same if you labeled the com tabs George Ralph and Frank, as long as the instructions used those names.

[Mark Onofri]

🧐

[Mark Onofri]

I'm almost convinced that your right Eddie.
Another thing that I've been won't about is, double winds.
1) if your using (2) two wires, do you use 1/2 the turns or,feet?
2) I got this formula from a monthly flyer put out by TonyP in the late 70's early 80's
({Gauge+gauge}÷2)-3=
the equivalent of what a single wind would be. I had to rewrite the formula because of the limited capabilities of my phone. There will be no quiz after so, don't sweat it.

[Bill from NH]

That old formula for double winds has been around for 50 years or more. How accurate it is might be a different matter.

 

You find the average of the two winds, your result is 3 gages bigger. Take the popular 27/28 arm. It's average is 27 1/2. Three

sizes bigger is 24 1/2. Therefore, a 27/28 arm is equivalent to a 24 1/2 wind. The 27/28 arms I had from Camen in the '70s weren't as fast as the 24 1/2 Steube. So the formula is theoretical.

 

There is such a formula for triple winds floating around but it's not as popular & I don't recall what it is,

[Mark Onofri]

Thanks Bill,as you well know,I have trouble with shoe laces. I did however take your advice and switched to Velcro. So,a triple wind is out of the question ( for now).
Was the formula readable? I used the 27/28 winde with the formula and it worked out to 24.5 same as the method you referenced?

[Bill from NH]

27+28 =55,   55/2= 27.5,   27.5-3= 24.5 (24 1/2)   

 

Using the formula, a double 27 would be equivalent to a 24S. Keep in mind that there isn't a standard number of turns for any double wind. Each winder might have their own variation & probably do. Then if you add in web designs, stack dia. & lengths, & timing, you get more differences. At one time, double winds were very popular but not anymore, except maybe from John Havlicek. We ran 27/28s back in the '70s at tracks with weak power supplies because we thought they drew less power that a 24S. I ran a 26S at East Hartford & Hampton Beach for the same reason. It did not work at East Hartford but I won at Hampton Beach with it.

[Don Weaver]

1) if your using (2) two wires, do you use 1/2 the turns or,feet?

 

No, the turns (or feet) remain the same.  You are winding two smaller wires in parallel instead of one larger wire.

 

Half size wire (i.e. 24-1/2) is available now so you can get the same size wire as double 27/28 wires by using a single 24-1/2 wire.

 

Note:  a 24-1/2 is a smaller size than a single 24.  362 circular mils vs 404 circular mils.

 

Don

[Jaeger Team]

IIRC in the sixties all possible types of winding were tried, in the end we always return to the classic system 🙂

[Mark Onofri]

Thanks guys. Don, that explains why it looks the same as a single wind. I'll post it later. Sometimes it's not about what works best. Some people are sticklers for authenticity. I'm out to have fun? My friends question my sanity because I think this is fun. I in turn question there gender.🤔

[Bill from NH]

With all this previously posted information, when are you going to start winding arms? Perhaps you can become the house brand for Speedy's. 

 

 

Note:  a 24-1/2 is a smaller size than a single 24. Just like house wire, the smaller the gage, the bigger the diameter. 12 is a larger diameter than is 16.

[Mark Onofri]

71T/9'dbl.33 it should wind 🧐(punt intended) up @1.25ohm just like Simko suggest.

Attached Images

• 

[Don Weaver]

 

Note:  a 24-1/2 is a smaller size than a single 24. Just like house wire, the smaller the gage, the bigger the diameter. 12 is a larger diameter than is 16.

 

Bill - just trying to point out that some might think that "24 and 1/2" wire is a 1/2 size bigger, not smaller, that a plain ole 24.  24 + 1/2 just sounds bigger just like 24 - 1/2 sounds smaller.

Don

[Bill from NH]

Don, I have no issue with your explanation of 24 & 24 1/2 sizes. I only added that house wiring was the same because there are some tradesmen on here that might have a better understanding of it than the finer gages used in small motors. It is sometimes difficult to picture a larger number actually meaning smaller.

[Mark Onofri]

I tried door bell magnet wire 😬.

[Bill from NH]

Any idea if the wire's insulation will withstand a motor's heat? Or are you just practicing winding?