1. Calculating Turns Per Layer

I am experimenting with a different auto traverse and am not sure I'm doing this correctly.

Given a specific rpm, be it 700 or 900 or 1000, what's the simplest way to calculate tpl with an adjustable speed traverse? I'm trying to figure out how many seconds the traverse must travel at a given rpm to solve for a specific tpl. And it's really late at the end of a long day...

0

2. Getting exact TPL consistency on a machine where traverse is not linked to speed and traverse distance is not linked to the machine is difficult at best. In my experience you have to make sure you set your speed to the RPM that works best for you and ALWAYS run it at that speed.

Then, set the traverse throw distance for the desired coil height.

Next you also need to play around to set the traverse speed to get the TPL you want. I always use the counter and simply count the number of turns it takes to complete ONE layer. I repeat this many times to make sure it is correct.

If you change the traverse throw distance (ie HB coil height to Strat coil height) you'll change the effective TPL count. Note, any change in RPM for the winding head, AND/OR any change in the traverse speed, AND/OR any change in the traverse distance, will change the actual TPL number.

Hope this helps!

0

3. Originally Posted by Jim Darr
Getting exact TPL consistency on a machine where traverse is not linked to speed and traverse distance is not linked to the machine is difficult at best. In my experience you have to make sure you set your speed to the RPM that works best for you and ALWAYS run it at that speed.

Then, set the traverse throw distance for the desired coil height.
The throw will be cam dependent, so I'm trying to eliminate this to find a more mathematical solution.

Next you also need to play around to set the traverse speed to get the TPL you want. I always use the counter and simply count the number of turns it takes to complete ONE layer. I repeat this many times to make sure it is correct.
And this is how I am doing it now. When you say "ONE layer," are you referring to one pass from left to right of the bobbin height, or are you talking back and forth?

If you change the traverse throw distance (ie HB coil height to Strat coil height) you'll change the effective TPL count. Note, any change in RPM for the winding head, AND/OR any change in the traverse speed, AND/OR any change in the traverse distance, will change the actual TPL number.

Hope this helps!
It does help but I have more or less gotten this far. I have a tach for both motors. So I 'can' calculate the tpl with some sort of precision, I'm just not sure what I am calculating for.

0

4. Originally Posted by jrdamien
The throw will be cam dependent, so I'm trying to eliminate this to find a more mathematical solution.

And this is how I am doing it now. When you say "ONE layer," are you referring to one pass from left to right of the bobbin height, or are you talking back and forth?

It does help but I have more or less gotten this far. I have a tach for both motors. So I 'can' calculate the tpl with some sort of precision, I'm just not sure what I am calculating for.
OK. Let's look at this from a difference perspective.

Yes, "ONE layer" is one pass from left to right of the bobbin height. Count turns in each direction to get a good average TPL.

As to your calculation, try limiting as many variables as you can to come up with a formula. I'm no mathematician, but know it can be done.

By keeping winding head RPM static, at say 1000 RPM, and keeping traverse length static by a particular cam, your only other variable is traverse speed. So if your traverse motor RPM is set to one speed count the number of turns per layer. Then change traverse motor RPM to another speed and count resulting TPL. Repeat a bunch of times and you should should get enough data for a simple formula, ratios, or at least a chart.

Realistically being able to control TPL is a must for consistency in today's marketplace. I applaud you for your efforts.

One of the reasons I love those old COWECOS, Bachis and Geo Stevens machines is their ability to easily control TPL.

Let us know how it turns out. Pics of the machine would be great.

0

5. Originally Posted by Jim Darr
OK. Let's look at this from a difference perspective.

Yes, "ONE layer" is one pass from left to right of the bobbin height. Count turns in each direction to get a good average TPL.
You're saying count in both direction for a literal average, not because tpl is a two layers. I know it's elementary but people new to this may read it and be confused.

As to your calculation, try limiting as many variables as you can to come up with a formula. I'm no mathematician, but know it can be done.

By keeping winding head RPM static, at say 1000 RPM, and keeping traverse length static by a particular cam, your only other variable is traverse speed. So if your traverse motor RPM is set to one speed count the number of turns per layer. Then change traverse motor RPM to another speed and count resulting TPL. Repeat a bunch of times and you should should get enough data for a simple formula, ratios, or at least a chart.
The best that can be done is an attempt at static. I'm no expect on motors, either, but don't most motors that have variable capacity fluctuate? I have a few different winders using different sorts of motors and all of them 'can' vary about 5 rpm. I'm guessing it's current draw and some other factors of the circuitry or, maybe, it's just a product of budget motors?

Realistically being able to control TPL is a must for consistency in today's marketplace. I applaud you for your efforts.
The exception being heavy scatter? But I also wonder about the consistency of any pickup made by any machine that isn't computer controlled. Even the play in the wire on a good old mechanical wire is going to change that consistency.

MY goal is more consistency, not computer like consistency. Since I don't want computer like accuracy I think I'm good with knowing the slight variances in consistency depending on how slight they turn out to be.

One of the reasons I love those old COWECOS, Bachis and Geo Stevens machines is their ability to easily control TPL.
I love them myself. Now if I could just find ONE to buy, rehab, and use. Hint hint. I see Geo's every now and again but without gears. Replacing those gears is going to be more costly than the machine.

Let us know how it turns out. Pics of the machine would be great.
Oh yes. It'd just a simple cam setup.

0

6. Originally Posted by jrdamien
You're saying count in both direction for a literal average, not because tpl is a two layers. I know it's elementary but people new to this may read it and be confused.

The best that can be done is an attempt at static. I'm no expect on motors, either, but don't most motors that have variable capacity fluctuate? I have a few different winders using different sorts of motors and all of them 'can' vary about 5 rpm. I'm guessing it's current draw and some other factors of the circuitry or, maybe, it's just a product of budget motors?

The exception being heavy scatter? But I also wonder about the consistency of any pickup made by any machine that isn't computer controlled. Even the play in the wire on a good old mechanical wire is going to change that consistency.

MY goal is more consistency, not computer like consistency. Since I don't want computer like accuracy I think I'm good with knowing the slight variances in consistency depending on how slight they turn out to be.

I love them myself. Now if I could just find ONE to buy, rehab, and use. Hint hint. I see Geo's every now and again but without gears. Replacing those gears is going to be more costly than the machine.

Oh yes. It'd just a simple cam setup.
Jesse,

Contrary to popular belief, "heavy scatter" can really be controlled well with many of the old school auto-traverse machines or even with a modern CNC machine, producing consistent results from one pickup to the next while getting the "hand scatter sound".

If you look at a lot of the golden era Single Coils (from the 50s & early 60s), which were all hand wound, some sounded great while others fell short. Heavy hand scatter alone does not guaranty good sound!!! This is why it is so hard to get consistent results from hand winding.

However, some winders swear buy their "hand winding recipes" and do get good results...this is a very controversial subject. My experience, and personal goals, are the creation of several formulas using TPL, winding patterns, wire type, wire thickness, magnet type and strength, and other variables with controllable machines with the sole purpose of being able to duplicate any desired sound.

Is the sound 100% accurate from pickup-to-pickup, probably not due to the some of those things you mentioned, but to the ear most are dead-on!!! I want my clients to get what they expect. Even though I have been hand winding since the mid-70s, and still do some even today, my better pickups are machine wound.

As far as your "hint hint", I just might be selling off some machines in the near future...stay tuned.

0

7. Originally Posted by Jim Darr
Jesse,

Contrary to popular belief, "heavy scatter" can really be controlled well with many of the old school auto-traverse machines or even with a modern CNC machine, producing consistent results from one pickup to the next while getting the "hand scatter sound".

If you look at a lot of the golden era Single Coils (from the 50s & early 60s), which were all hand wound, some sounded great while others fell short. Heavy hand scatter alone does not guaranty good sound!!! This is why it is so hard to get consistent results from hand winding.
I know it can be with a modern CNC machine and will take your word for it regarding older mechanical machines (again, I'd love to find out). But all I meant by that was that there's a difficulty reproducing a heavy hand scatter with machine like accuracy. I wasn't insisting this is good or bad or makes good or bad pickups.

And, with some pickups, I'm not even convinced it really matters.

However, some winders swear buy their "hand winding recipes" and do get good results...this is a very controversial subject. My experience, and personal goals, are the creation of several formulas using TPL, winding patterns, wire type, wire thickness, magnet type and strength, and other variables with controllable machines with the sole purpose of being able to duplicate any desired sound.
I think that's a common goal. Personally the single coils pickups I wind I have always wound by hand and I can do it fast enough that it would likely take longer to translate that procedure to a machine. But that tune might change if I ever have hundreds of orders a month.

Is the sound 100% accurate from pickup-to-pickup, probably not due to the some of those things you mentioned, but to the ear most are dead-on!!! I want my clients to get what they expect. Even though I have been hand winding since the mid-70s, and still do some even today, my better pickups are machine wound.

As far as your "hint hint", I just might be selling off some machines in the near future...stay tuned.
Well now I am going to msg you. Stay tuned!

0

8. Here's a picture to share. I'm using the same mechanism as I was with the fishing reel traverse (the thread is in here somewhere) but, ultimately, that reel traverse was too complex with too many moving parts to be satisfactory. It worked great but...

This is self explanatory.

0

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•