Motors, torque, windings Scale Speed

[mmagliaro]

That's 10.9 mph with 10 cars  vs 6.6 mph with 20 cars

This one appears to use less power (313mW to go 6.6 mph  vs  413 mW to go 6.08 mph, each with 20 cars).
It can move the train a little faster, and consume 25% less power.

But... the speed variation is greater when you change the load from 10 to 20 cars:   
10.9 down to 6.6: a 40% drop,
 vs  8.58 down to 6.08: a 29% drop.

I would argue that the newer rewind, when compared to the earlier one, is making the classic
"trade" of  rpm for torque.  It can run faster and use less power, but it slows down more under load.

Interesting.
I sure am glad you are willing to rewind these armatures.   We are learning a lot by somebody doing it,
and I would not do it.

[victor miranda]

Hi Max,

I am/was willing to run the test (all be it, backwards...) to see if I could understand
what you use as a gauge of motor torque.
it is a way to see how a motor acts under varying loads.
I am coming to believe that I have never tried to test for reserve torque.
the only test I ever used for torque was power level to motor stall.
what power is required to break the driver loose.
I have not measured this in any of these runs.
it didn't seem a useful measurement.

I am thinking about how ... not very clear the results are looking.
when I revisit all the data I am not seeing a obvious effect from
the rewrapping.

so I am looking for why the results do not show the expected.
two motors given 2 and 3 times the number of wraps as an ordinary motor.
(the Atlas black and Kato motor look and measure the same.)
and I am not sure I see torque levels increase in those proportions.

so far they show the atlas gray motor as the motor to beat
for overall good performance.

I have one note about high torque motors.
If the #3 is any indication, high torque locos do not mu easily.

victor