X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.3) with ESMTPS id 2953027 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:31:10 -0400 Received-SPF: softfail receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.102.122.148; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,589,1204520400"; d="scan'208";a="10087759" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Jun 2008 10:30:31 -0400 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m54EUV2M005335 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 10:30:31 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m54EUVqj008109 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:30:31 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 10:30:31 -0400 Received: from [64.102.38.151] ([64.102.38.151]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 10:30:31 -0400 Message-ID: <4846A709.9060704@nc.rr.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:30:33 -0400 From: Ernest Christley Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: combined starter alternator References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jun 2008 14:30:31.0082 (UTC) FILETIME=[8AA4A0A0:01C8C64F] Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=echristley@nc.rr.com; dkim=neutral Al Gietzen wrote: > For this to work as a starter, I'd need it to generate as much power as > a typical starter. During cranking, I believe a typical starter will > draw 200A at around 11 volts. I'm sure someone will correct me if that > isn't typical. That's 2200 watts, or around 3HP. One way to go would > be to adapt one of "hub motors", but the largest of the flat motors that > I've seen are rated at only 500W (<1Hp). > ------------------------------- > > I'm going from memory here, but 2-3 years ago I did some kind of measurement > on the starter current (don't even remember what I did, but I think the > initial surge of current was way up there, but once spinning I was surprised > that it was down around 60 -80 amps. This was during initial engine tests, > and perhaps the compression was low. > > FWIW, > > Al > > That's fairly typical of electric motors, Al. A big inrush to get things moving, then dropping off to something less demanding. If you put a big load on the motor, such that it bogs down, the current will shoot back up. Unless regulated, it will burn itself up trying to do what you ask of it, ie, the typical burning smell from your wife or naive son trying to make a worn out engine run with the starter. The numbers I've seen for the flat motors are running about 700W peak. 350W continuous. Still only 1/3rd of where what would be needed for our purposes. I expect some motors that will fit the bill will be on the market very soon now if gas prices stay where they are. 3 or 4 Hp would make a reasonable bicycle for commuting to work.