Katier Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 I have just got my first chassis properly running under DCC power then reading through the forums Hollywood foundary's mentioned the 1015 which I used is 'not very powerful'.. No surprise there I guess as it is a tiny motor, but I do wonder if I would be better off with bigger motors where I can. Specifically the 1020 or 1024. The first kit I built is the 3SMR 3mm/ft J72 white metal kit and a 1015 was the motor reccomended but pretty sure she could take something a little longer - if it was worth the fettling of the body to do it. I also am about to embark on a N10 which is obviously a larger loco. Thoughts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/topic/10081-how-to-select-a-motor-for-your-model/page__p__88541__hl__%2Bmashima+%2Bpower+%2Boutput__fromsearch__1#entry88541 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katier Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share Posted January 8, 2012 LOL Thanks Mick I think that's pretty conclusive.. shame I've got 3 of the little perishers to use!!! One will HAVE to go into the J79 (nothing bigger will remotely fit) but definitely be looking at 1020's elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Al Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 LOL Thanks Mick I think that's pretty conclusive.. shame I've got 3 of the little perishers to use!!! One will HAVE to go into the J79 (nothing bigger will remotely fit) but definitely be looking at 1020's elsewhere. I'm less convinced. I woulds start with the 1015s and see how they perform in your J79. All the detail in that post is well and good - but you don't know what torque you'll really need in the real world application. It could be that the 1015 produces ample for your needs in which case there's no need to consider anything else. And in the extra space you could fit a bigger flywheel or whatever. Moreover, it's not clear from those plots if the "power" means anything. If it's total power dissipated (i.e. V*I) then another important factor is heating - if most of that power is dumped as heat in the windings then it never gets anywhere near the rails to create motion, so surely the figures are meaningless? Also, in my experience of 1015s (about 6 now) there is a bit of variability in them - the current specced in the plot is 100mA - most of mine run on a lot less than this. One seems about this and it's notably slower running than the others, and a couple seem to have different strengths of magnet or armature magnetisation, as turning them by hand you can feel the 'cog' between poles, as compared others which don't. In short you may get better performance than you would expect from the plots. In short - try the 1015 (especially as you already have some), there's every chance it'll do everything you need. You'll be able to see if it's straining if the current consumption rises a lot when you stick a big load behind it! Cheers, Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollywoodfoundry Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The plots shown in that posting were prepared from data obtained through some pretty serious testing by myself and the Eighteen Millimetre Society, and is accurate. Alan is correct in what he says about the variability of 1015 motors. This is because there are at least 3 1015 motors, one with straight laminations, one with skewed laminations and an open frame version. All are different in their performance. Alan is also correct about power being dissipated in the windings, and it happens quite a lot with 1015 motors. Being a can motor, there is no satisfactory way to dissipate the heat from the windings, so the whole motor heats up. This heating can destroy the motor at one extreme or at the very least, dry out the lubrication. The 1015 does tend to get hotter than the larger motors because it is probably the least efficient design from an electromagnetic point of view. Take a look at the following photograph: Notice the difference in the length of the armature stack, this length has a great effect of the power and torque performance of the motor. The top motor is the 1015 open frame version, it has 14 laminations and the advantage of an open frame to dissipate heat. The next armature down is from the recent version of the 1015 can motor, and it actually has two fewer laminations at 12. Note it is also a skew wound motor. The bottom armature is from a 1024 motor, also skew wound, but the lamination stack is three times the length of the 1015 can motor. As a result, the 1024 develops 3 times the power output of the1015 for only a 9mm increase in motor length. Of course a lot of the length in a 1015 motor is taken up with the commutator and bearings. I wonder how many people are aware that a skew wound motor, while exhibiting less 'cogging' at lower speeds, sacifices power and torque as a result. This is because power and torque are both products of the area of armature lamination exposed to the magnets. In the 1015, it did not have a lot to begin with, so skew winding it reduces its power. The 1015 motor, when placed under a light load, will not begin to rotate until there is around 5 volts applied to it, whereas the 1020 and 1024 will start to rotate at about 2.5-3 volts. Again, due to the less efficient magnetic design. The 1015 can be used successfully, but in my opinion, only when the drive ratio is sufficiently highly geared, for example 60 to 1 or higher. And then it is likely to be quite noisy and only suitable for slow moving models. For all these reasons, I put the warning on my web site that the motor is weak. When you purchase a kit with motor included or an RTR model, the choice of motor has been made for you, hopefully by someone who knows what they are talking about. However my customers are free to choose whatever motor they like, and sadly, they frequently make a poor choice. It seems they do not fully understand that a small motor is not the same as a larger one, with their choice simply driven by the idea of what will fit easily into the space. I quite often get people asking for something like a 6 axle diesel mechanism for smaller gauges driven by a single 1015 motor, so the warning was provided in hope that they would not continue to ask for impractical solutions. I have to report it has not eased the situation much. So, in summation, fit the largest motor that you can into a model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Al Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 As an N gauge modeller, the 1015 is almost uniquely the only motor that will fit in a lot of cases. Moreover, in my experience it's still the best by far as compared to similarly sized Dapol, Farish and other small can motors. They do get warm, but even at full speed I don't think overly-so - and certainly for me they rarely run like this, so I'm not concerned particularly. The variation I mention is nothing to do with different types - they are all identical 1015 cans, several bought at exactly the same time. Therefore I'd still question how many repetitions (i.e. same test on completely fresh motor of same type) were undertaken on testing, as for 1015 some of mine run similar (in terms of current) to your figures, and some on significantly less. Also, I still think the talk to torque/power out is relative. Yes, the 1024 may be 3 times higher, but if the 1015 gives out say double what you actually need, then you don't really gain much from going to 1024 I'd have thought. Like you say you obviously wouldn't put such a motor in large scale models, but for 3mm and 2mm scale it's invaluable I think. Thanks for the internals snap - I've often wondered exactly what the 1015 precisely looks like inside, and from that it looks a quality part. Best Regards, Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollywoodfoundry Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Al, I have a glass jar that holds motors that did not get up and run properly from initial fitting, otherwise called juvenile failures, and the 1015 is hugely over-represented in the contents of that jar. So your observation about variability in the 1015 is pretty true. However I cannot agree with your view "Also, I still think the talk to torque/power out is relative. Yes, the 1024 may be 3 times higher, but if the 1015 gives out say double what you actually need, then you don't really gain much from going to 1024 I'd have thought." Irrespective of whether a 1015 gives out more or less than the stated figure, if a larger motor can be fitted to any model, it is preferable to the smaller motor. A larger motor running under the same conditions of load will always run cooler and quieter. So my advice to Katier is, if there is room for a larger version of the 10 series motor, fit it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Al Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Irrespective of whether a 1015 gives out more or less than the stated figure, if a larger motor can be fitted to any model, it is preferable to the smaller motor. A larger motor running under the same conditions of load will always run cooler and quieter. So my advice to Katier is, if there is room for a larger version of the 10 series motor, fit it. I'm not overly disagreeing to be honest. But it does seem like a bit of a 1015 bashing session here! But I've certainly not found the 1015 lacking in power or torque for N gauge use, even when faced with 15-20 coaches or 60 wagons as a load. Therefore I'd suspect for small 3mm scale models it would be equally happy. As such, the point really is that whilst I still feel the power/torque figures quoted are useful in relative terms; they are difficult to relate to what is needed in any particular situation - does my loco need 10g per cm of torque? Or would 2.5 still be double anything I'd need? If so, would I benefit more from having a smaller motor, and maybe a much larger flywheel or a much easier job building my kit? Also, while I would agree that fitting such a small motor to a large OO model is a bad plan, I have seen it done, very successfully - namely with a Lima class 26 that had a pretty ickle Mashima can motor mounted at one end, and the majority of the rest of the loco filled with the largest flywheel I've ever seen. I've never seen a loco that ran so well. I would say to the OP that whilst fitting the largest motor possible is obviously the logical thing to do, if it means other things can't be done (e.g. no space for sound, smaller flywheel or no flywheel at all) then it's worth considering the options for dropping down in size to some of the smaller motors. If the OP has confirmed that 3SMR recommend the 1015 then someone must have built their kit during development and found that motor up to the job, so I'd be pretty sure it's probably fine! You might go to a lot of extra work to shoehorn in a larger unit and find little appreciable difference in performance at the end of it all. And given that the OP already has 1015s, and the mounting for the 1020 and 1024 is the same, why not try with what the OP already has? It'll be pretty clear if it's not up to the job pretty quickly. It can always then be swapped. The 1015 IMHO is way ahead of anything I've seen of similar size. As such, I think it's a great buy for a tenner. Cheers, Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katier Posted January 18, 2012 Author Share Posted January 18, 2012 *wonders where your getting 1015's for a tenner from!!!* Actually Finney and Smith supplied the 1015's the model is from 3SMR.. actually not sure what 3SMR reccomend!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollywoodfoundry Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I'm not overly disagreeing to be honest. But it does seem like a bit of a 1015 bashing session here! No, not at all, just an attempt to warn people that the motor may not be up to the job they expect it to do. I build mechanisms from 9mm gauge up to 22.4mm, and the 1015 is not much use in the larger gauges. I also think that having fitted several thousand 1015 motors to drive mechanisms would give me a pretty good idea of how they perform. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Al Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 *wonders where your getting 1015's for a tenner from!!!* KBscale: http://www.kbscale.com/motors-gears.html Way cheaper than anywhere else, excellent service (no connection, just satisfied customer). Cheers, Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Al Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I also think that having fitted several thousand 1015 motors to drive mechanisms would give me a pretty good idea of how they perform. Maybe, but in N I've looked at all available and the 1015 certainly beats all the other cans (Union Mills, Farish, Dapol etc etc) unless you want to spend a huge amount more. Like I say - for a tenner yet to be beaten. Maybe Farish's new coreless motor will start to come close, but this has yet to break cover. It certainly is a very interesting development. And.............I still would like to know how the perfomance plots relate to real world requirements...! I think the OP will do fine on 1015. The J72 is a small loco, and 3mm is a small scale. Cheers, Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Errrm there is a motor that is somewhat better than a 1015, and it can be found here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.