This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Alternator article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Material from Alternator was split to Alternator (automotive) on 30-08-2013. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
It seems to me that an alternator, as described on this page, is just a local definition for an electrical generator. Steam turbine generators are called "turbogenerators" in North America. Additionally, Gas turbine generators are also called turbogenerators. Alternator is an archaic term in North America for this kind of industrial machine. The "alternator" term is reserved for car and truck electrical generators. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.48.74.181 ( talk) 02:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Alternator&oldid=211659249
Here is the culprit that did it.
(cur | prev) 00:37, 14 May 2008 Wtshymanski (talk | contribs) (17,030 bytes) (copyedit - why are we talking about motors here? two phase can be symmetrical, too - link.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:01, 11 May 2008 TubularWorld (talk | contribs) (17,805 bytes) (Undid revision 211659222 by 76.226.25.243 (talk)) (undo)
-- Ericg33 ( talk) 03:51, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I notice that the issue has arisen on this page several times since 2006. I propose that this article be rewritten into two pages: automotive alternator and AC electric generator with appropriate cross-links. When both articles are in good shape, alternator can become a disambiguation page. I'm willing to work on this if others think it's a good idea. M Carling 08:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
This article has been tagged for merging. Any thoughts? Andy Dingley ( talk) 09:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Permanent magnet synchronous generator contains a paragraph or two that would be useful here - that article has no references or links and rather than fix it in place, perhaps it should be redirected and merged. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
You will not find a better multimedia effect on wikipedia. If you can then tell me. Below is the edit that removed it.
(cur | prev) 14:17, 12 December 2012 Wtshymanski (talk | contribs) . . (21,196 bytes) (-3,490) . . (linearity not required and this whole discussion is beside the point for alternators anyway) (undo)
REVERT IT!-- Ericg33 ( talk) 03:00, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
This section seems quite extensive to me, enough to merit its own article. While archiving this talk page, I had a quick glance and noticed some debate over this, but I didn't spot any definitive votes over what should be done (as I said, it was a quick glance, so I apologise if I overlooked such a vote). For this reason I'm inviting a vote below on whether this section should create its own article and how.
The diagram in the Principal of Operation section looks really great and it makes easier for readers to follow. However, I'm not sure if it is based on a reliable source somewhere. All sources I have searched point out to another design where the poles are in rotation similarly to this design, but they use two coils, one on the top, the other on the bottom instead of this rectangular armature loop. The two coils are wired serially but having the winding in the opposite direction between the two coils. An example of what I'm talking about is here. My feeling is that the design shown in the diagram in this article would work also, but I couldn't find a reference for it. I hope it is not WP:OR. If anyone know any sources that mention about this simple design, please share. Thanks. Z22 ( talk) 17:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Why is there a long section in this article about multiphase ac motors? It has nothing to do with alternators and seems completely out of place. If there's meant to be some relevance perhaps it could be made somewhat more explicit. 84.93.97.179 ( talk) 16:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I would like to propose reorganization of this article a bit to help readers in the navigation. No information is removed (brushless alternators is moved to the right sub-section). Also I would like to add some more info on classification of alternators from a public domain document. I put a draft version of my proposed change in User:Z22/sandbox/draft. Here is the diff [1]. If there is no objection, I will populate the change to this article. Feel free to suggest further changes or edit directly to that sandbox page. When we are comfortable, I will copy the final to the article page. I will put a proper attribution for those contributors. Thanks. Z22 ( talk) 00:27, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I've worked out the wiring of an historic 750 Kw poly-phase poly-dipole Rotating Armature Alternator, part of
Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park.
Please see my article for creation "Rotating Armature Alternator" under my username space Douglas Nelson Turner. I've read your following line--
"The revolving armature type is found only in alternators of low power rating and generally is not used."
Still, since my machine is now only an historic interest and relatively low power, would you consider placing a note in your history section, that my 750 Kilowatt alternator may be the most powerful rotating armature poly-phase poly-dipole example, or refer to the main article Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park in your "see also"?
Thanks, Doug.. Douglas Nelson Turner ( talk) 17:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Two phase wiring is simple, compared to 3-phase.
Folsom was the first to send three phase high power.
Folsom was the first, 13 July 1895, to send 60hz, three phase, high power(2010hp - two alternators) long distance. Niagara transmitted only 1000 to Buffalo.
The Folsom machines had record power at distance, while using modern phasing and frequency. They helped 60hz win the war of frequencies. The Folsom Machines were the apex revolving armatures and thus deserve note. -- Douglas Nelson Turner ( talk) 00:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Folsom held the world record for a while and beat Niagara Falls to the punch.
As I said "The Niagara machine's field rotated around the armature! ". The 25hz frequency was doomed as fatally flawed. Scott transformers reflect an unbalance to the source, when the two phase loads are not balanced. It is impossible to correct for this shortcoming.
This machine was huge for it's time. It has record power as 3phase revolving armature. It is the apex of it's type. If the "Folsom Park" is of note in Wikipedia, then it's record holding alternator should merit note in Wikipedia. This article has a sub-section called "By rotating part". One small historic footnote referencing the Folsom machines, before the sentence "The revolving armature type is not often used." would not hurt. -- Douglas Nelson Turner ( talk) 05:43, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
This article has long had a section on applications with a sub section for Radio alternators. They're not an important means of transmitting radio, but they are an unusual and significant application for alternators, indicating an upper frequency limit and requiring novel construction techniques.
This section is now being repeatedly deleted, despite opposition, by that regular merger and hatchetman of articles, Wtshymanski. Anyone have any thoughts as to whether this section should stay? Andy Dingley ( talk) 02:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
can a 2002 pathfinder alternator work on a 1997 pathfinder — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.235.51.141 ( talk) 22:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't see the point of mentioning Tesla's alternator in the History section. It was not the first high frequency alternator - Elihu Thomson invented the high frequency oscillator in 1889. [2], [3], [4], [5] If we're going to mention radio alternators, it should be either Thomson's or the most notable: the Fessenden or Alexanderson alternators. -- Chetvorno TALK 03:32, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Presently the 'Synchronous speeds' section states:
One cycle of alternating current is produced each time a pair of field poles passes over a point on the stationary winding. The relation between speed and frequency is N = 120 f / P {\displaystyle N=120f/P} N=120f/P, where f {\displaystyle f} f is the frequency in Hz (cycles per second). P {\displaystyle P} P is the number of poles (2,4,6...) and N {\displaystyle N} N is the rotational speed in revolutions per minute (RPM).
I'm not sure that this statement is correct. My understanding is that one 360 degree rotation of a rotor pole pair generates one cycle in a stator coil. I suspect that the factor of 2 relates to the ripple after full wave rectification (full wave rectification doubles the frequency).
Also the title, 'Synchronous speeds' is meaningless and does not relate to the contents of the section.
I also suggest that the frequency of the field wave form should be the subject of the formula:
Fs = (N * RPM)/60
Where: Fs is the frequency of the stator coil signal in Hz. N = the number of rotor pole pairs. RPM = the rotor speed in revolutions per minute.
This formula is simpler and easier to follow.
CPES ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I love a shotgun. Hear a rustling in the bush? Blast away - maybe some pellets hit a target. What could possibly go wrong? And it makes you feel so *powerful* - a real boost to the ego.
But if we are tagging WP articles, we should identify particular claims that need stiffening up with a little blue footnote. If anyone has read the references already cited in this article, they'd have a pretty good idea of what alternators do. A stale shotgun tag at the top of the article isn't helping here. Not every paragraph needs a reference, if there's a comprehensive set of references listed in the article. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 18:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
What constitutes, in your opinion, a claim that needs a reference? Are we allowed two sentences in a row that rely on the same reference? -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 00:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
The practical energy conversion efficiency of alternators neds to be mentioned, perhaps with a comparison against d.c. generators. EEye ( talk) 11:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Why does the caption for the first photo mention the Russian empire? To my knowledge Budapest was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1909. Wikigreenwood ( talk) 22:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
upon a re-read I think I understand what the caption is trying to say, will edit for clarity. Wikigreenwood ( talk) 22:51, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Alternator article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Material from Alternator was split to Alternator (automotive) on 30-08-2013. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
It seems to me that an alternator, as described on this page, is just a local definition for an electrical generator. Steam turbine generators are called "turbogenerators" in North America. Additionally, Gas turbine generators are also called turbogenerators. Alternator is an archaic term in North America for this kind of industrial machine. The "alternator" term is reserved for car and truck electrical generators. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.48.74.181 ( talk) 02:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Alternator&oldid=211659249
Here is the culprit that did it.
(cur | prev) 00:37, 14 May 2008 Wtshymanski (talk | contribs) (17,030 bytes) (copyedit - why are we talking about motors here? two phase can be symmetrical, too - link.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:01, 11 May 2008 TubularWorld (talk | contribs) (17,805 bytes) (Undid revision 211659222 by 76.226.25.243 (talk)) (undo)
-- Ericg33 ( talk) 03:51, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I notice that the issue has arisen on this page several times since 2006. I propose that this article be rewritten into two pages: automotive alternator and AC electric generator with appropriate cross-links. When both articles are in good shape, alternator can become a disambiguation page. I'm willing to work on this if others think it's a good idea. M Carling 08:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
This article has been tagged for merging. Any thoughts? Andy Dingley ( talk) 09:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Permanent magnet synchronous generator contains a paragraph or two that would be useful here - that article has no references or links and rather than fix it in place, perhaps it should be redirected and merged. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
You will not find a better multimedia effect on wikipedia. If you can then tell me. Below is the edit that removed it.
(cur | prev) 14:17, 12 December 2012 Wtshymanski (talk | contribs) . . (21,196 bytes) (-3,490) . . (linearity not required and this whole discussion is beside the point for alternators anyway) (undo)
REVERT IT!-- Ericg33 ( talk) 03:00, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
This section seems quite extensive to me, enough to merit its own article. While archiving this talk page, I had a quick glance and noticed some debate over this, but I didn't spot any definitive votes over what should be done (as I said, it was a quick glance, so I apologise if I overlooked such a vote). For this reason I'm inviting a vote below on whether this section should create its own article and how.
The diagram in the Principal of Operation section looks really great and it makes easier for readers to follow. However, I'm not sure if it is based on a reliable source somewhere. All sources I have searched point out to another design where the poles are in rotation similarly to this design, but they use two coils, one on the top, the other on the bottom instead of this rectangular armature loop. The two coils are wired serially but having the winding in the opposite direction between the two coils. An example of what I'm talking about is here. My feeling is that the design shown in the diagram in this article would work also, but I couldn't find a reference for it. I hope it is not WP:OR. If anyone know any sources that mention about this simple design, please share. Thanks. Z22 ( talk) 17:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Why is there a long section in this article about multiphase ac motors? It has nothing to do with alternators and seems completely out of place. If there's meant to be some relevance perhaps it could be made somewhat more explicit. 84.93.97.179 ( talk) 16:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I would like to propose reorganization of this article a bit to help readers in the navigation. No information is removed (brushless alternators is moved to the right sub-section). Also I would like to add some more info on classification of alternators from a public domain document. I put a draft version of my proposed change in User:Z22/sandbox/draft. Here is the diff [1]. If there is no objection, I will populate the change to this article. Feel free to suggest further changes or edit directly to that sandbox page. When we are comfortable, I will copy the final to the article page. I will put a proper attribution for those contributors. Thanks. Z22 ( talk) 00:27, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I've worked out the wiring of an historic 750 Kw poly-phase poly-dipole Rotating Armature Alternator, part of
Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park.
Please see my article for creation "Rotating Armature Alternator" under my username space Douglas Nelson Turner. I've read your following line--
"The revolving armature type is found only in alternators of low power rating and generally is not used."
Still, since my machine is now only an historic interest and relatively low power, would you consider placing a note in your history section, that my 750 Kilowatt alternator may be the most powerful rotating armature poly-phase poly-dipole example, or refer to the main article Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park in your "see also"?
Thanks, Doug.. Douglas Nelson Turner ( talk) 17:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Two phase wiring is simple, compared to 3-phase.
Folsom was the first to send three phase high power.
Folsom was the first, 13 July 1895, to send 60hz, three phase, high power(2010hp - two alternators) long distance. Niagara transmitted only 1000 to Buffalo.
The Folsom machines had record power at distance, while using modern phasing and frequency. They helped 60hz win the war of frequencies. The Folsom Machines were the apex revolving armatures and thus deserve note. -- Douglas Nelson Turner ( talk) 00:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Folsom held the world record for a while and beat Niagara Falls to the punch.
As I said "The Niagara machine's field rotated around the armature! ". The 25hz frequency was doomed as fatally flawed. Scott transformers reflect an unbalance to the source, when the two phase loads are not balanced. It is impossible to correct for this shortcoming.
This machine was huge for it's time. It has record power as 3phase revolving armature. It is the apex of it's type. If the "Folsom Park" is of note in Wikipedia, then it's record holding alternator should merit note in Wikipedia. This article has a sub-section called "By rotating part". One small historic footnote referencing the Folsom machines, before the sentence "The revolving armature type is not often used." would not hurt. -- Douglas Nelson Turner ( talk) 05:43, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
This article has long had a section on applications with a sub section for Radio alternators. They're not an important means of transmitting radio, but they are an unusual and significant application for alternators, indicating an upper frequency limit and requiring novel construction techniques.
This section is now being repeatedly deleted, despite opposition, by that regular merger and hatchetman of articles, Wtshymanski. Anyone have any thoughts as to whether this section should stay? Andy Dingley ( talk) 02:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
can a 2002 pathfinder alternator work on a 1997 pathfinder — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.235.51.141 ( talk) 22:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't see the point of mentioning Tesla's alternator in the History section. It was not the first high frequency alternator - Elihu Thomson invented the high frequency oscillator in 1889. [2], [3], [4], [5] If we're going to mention radio alternators, it should be either Thomson's or the most notable: the Fessenden or Alexanderson alternators. -- Chetvorno TALK 03:32, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Presently the 'Synchronous speeds' section states:
One cycle of alternating current is produced each time a pair of field poles passes over a point on the stationary winding. The relation between speed and frequency is N = 120 f / P {\displaystyle N=120f/P} N=120f/P, where f {\displaystyle f} f is the frequency in Hz (cycles per second). P {\displaystyle P} P is the number of poles (2,4,6...) and N {\displaystyle N} N is the rotational speed in revolutions per minute (RPM).
I'm not sure that this statement is correct. My understanding is that one 360 degree rotation of a rotor pole pair generates one cycle in a stator coil. I suspect that the factor of 2 relates to the ripple after full wave rectification (full wave rectification doubles the frequency).
Also the title, 'Synchronous speeds' is meaningless and does not relate to the contents of the section.
I also suggest that the frequency of the field wave form should be the subject of the formula:
Fs = (N * RPM)/60
Where: Fs is the frequency of the stator coil signal in Hz. N = the number of rotor pole pairs. RPM = the rotor speed in revolutions per minute.
This formula is simpler and easier to follow.
CPES ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I love a shotgun. Hear a rustling in the bush? Blast away - maybe some pellets hit a target. What could possibly go wrong? And it makes you feel so *powerful* - a real boost to the ego.
But if we are tagging WP articles, we should identify particular claims that need stiffening up with a little blue footnote. If anyone has read the references already cited in this article, they'd have a pretty good idea of what alternators do. A stale shotgun tag at the top of the article isn't helping here. Not every paragraph needs a reference, if there's a comprehensive set of references listed in the article. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 18:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
What constitutes, in your opinion, a claim that needs a reference? Are we allowed two sentences in a row that rely on the same reference? -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 00:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
The practical energy conversion efficiency of alternators neds to be mentioned, perhaps with a comparison against d.c. generators. EEye ( talk) 11:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Why does the caption for the first photo mention the Russian empire? To my knowledge Budapest was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1909. Wikigreenwood ( talk) 22:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
upon a re-read I think I understand what the caption is trying to say, will edit for clarity. Wikigreenwood ( talk) 22:51, 29 July 2020 (UTC)