FIGUERA'S AETHER MAGNETIC FIELDS LINEAR PUMP, REVIVED

[Ufopolitics]

Hello All, Hello dear friend @kampen ,

So, I like the way you analyzed the Linear-Series Setup on your previous post.

You are completely right, I still have not proved Over Unity on this new design, simply, because I have not finished building the Mechanical Commutator, Rotary switch.

Therefore, I have not tested it yet.

So far I have been able to Test my previous Setup, which is basically an "extension" of the Original Figuera design.

And there I have been able to observe a purely Generator behavior, with a Solid Output, which depends solely on the speed I drive the Displacing Field(s).
However, I encounter many Mechanical Issues whenever I tried to Increase driving speed (RPM'S) over 2000, Brush started to loose contact, and the whole thing dropped down!
I strongly believe at 3600 RPM's, I would have been able to observe some gain at output...
Unfortunately, to achieve that I would have to start a new type of Commutator from Scratch, based on Centrifugal Forces Assisting...
Then I came up with the Dual Brushes design on a Linear Series Platform...so, I did not pursue the Single Brush Centrifugal Build...
However, now, once that I finish the Dual Brush Commutator based on Centrifugal Assistance, I can also Re-Test my Old Setup...only running the Positive Brush, and disconnecting all other ones.
And, yes, I intend to go back and test my old setup.
That was the reason why, I am building this Four Brushes (Two for Commutation, and Two for Continuous Slip Rings) , Plus 32 Contact Rotary Switch, (which will cut/reduce the Max Time from 3600 on a 16 Elements, to 1800 Max) in a completely way to take it apart, as make it a Single Brush/Single Continuos slip ring...as it would be a Modular Structure.
Then -for sure- I will Re-Test my Old Setup!...(As it was an "Unfinished Test")!!

However, the Figuera Original Design, whenever I did an "Extended Design" version, it comprehends some 'Flaws' which I have mentioned before:

• Just ONE Positive Rotary Brush, serving as a "Center Wiper".
• Between TWO Negative Anchored Points, at each extreme ends of the Sequential Series Coils.
• Then, the Effect we achieve here is Expanding (by Strectching) the Field on one end.
• While Retracting (Compressing) the other Field on the opposite end.
• Where these Two Movements of the Field takes place at UNISON.
• This Consecutive and Alternatively movements of the Two Fields above a Secondary Coil, generates the Output.

Now, apparently, this approach looks correct as we are getting an Output on Secondary, or Secondaries, if added Two to each ends.
And, yes, we are actually moving the Two Fields across Spacetime, then obtaining an Output.
(I have several video tests to prove this on my YouTube Channel)
But, when I carefully looked at the Magnetic Field Properties when I was doing these movements I realized:

• The Field was "Stretched" or "Expanded" by adding more Coils to the Sequential Row of Series Coils.
• Therefore, the Field GAINED more Resistance (by adding coil by coil) on its Stretching Process.
• Hence, it looses Currents (Amperage) [Resistance works completely INVERSE to Currents].
• Realizing our Expanded Field was much Weaker, the more I "Stretch" it.
• While the Opposite took place whenever Field was Retracted or Compressed.
• By taking OFF Coils from the Row, Field was loosing Resistance.
• Then gaining Currents (Amperage)

This Approach is COMPLETELY OPPOSITE Field behavior that what we need to accomplish!!

Meaning that whenever Field Expands, we need to have 'Ideally' this scenario:

• An Expanding, Growing Currents Inducing Field, which makes Field much Stronger.
• Therefore, Induced Coils gets Real Strong Change over Time from a Stronger Field.
• On this setup, it is understood that whenever Field 'Expands' it does it OVER its Secondary Main Coil.

NOW, even with ALL the 'Flaws' that I have cited above, ALL the DEFECTS on that Design, I was STILL able to see a HUGE Output Voltage Increase over Input!!
Even, NOT being able to Drive my very rudimentary Rotary Switch over the EXPECTED RPM's (3600)  and ONLY Max I was able to reach, maybe HALF, or 1800-2000 RPM's
I still observed an Output GAIN over my Input...

Anyways, getting back to this Analysis, when we analize the way ANY Rotary Generator works...:

• Inducing Field NEVER gains nor looses currents.
• Therefore, Inducing Field does NOT gains nor Looses Strength.
• It remains with the same Strength during its whole operation.
• Field only displaces over Spacetime.
• And, whenever there is a VD (Voltage Drop) when loaded
• All Inducing Field needs to do is...
• To Increase Rotational Speed.
• Which translates to: Increasing Spacetime Displacement Speed.
• Over the Induced, Static Coils (Secondaries)

Then, like I have said before...Electromagnetic Induction 'bolts down' (simplifies) to an EXCHANGE PROCESS:

• Inducing Field generates an Induction on Secondaries or Induced Coils.
• Then when Output, Induced Coils, are Loaded, automatically this originates .[
  
• A Second Magnetic Field which is generated on the Induced Coils.
• That according to Lenz Law: This Induced Field is of Opposite Configuration to the Inducing Field.
  
• Therefore, is understood this Opposite Induced Field will DRAIN POWER from the Inducing Field.

So, Electromagnetic Induction is simply based on a Constant and Mutual EXCHANGE Process between these Two Fields (Inducing><Induced Fields):

• Inducing/Exciting/Input Magnetic Field as the Supply Side.
• Induced/Excited Output Magnetic Field as the Demand Side.

Where the Inducing Field would be ALWAYS the SUPPLY SIDE, -On this Exchanging Relationship-
While the Induced Field would always be the DEMANDING SIDE on this constant exchange.

Then, commom sense reasoning prevails here:

• The "SUPPLY SIDE"  FIELD, can NEVER, EVER Downsize/Reduce its Strength while this Exchange Operation takes place!!
• Otherwise (If it does loose Strength) we will notice a HUGE Voltage Drop (VD) at our other Exchanging Side:
• Meaning the DEMAND SIDE (Output Coils)
• Then, NO MATTER how much we increase the Speed/ Frequency.
• We will not be able to Supply the Demand from Output!!

This above simplifies, why, I was getting Huge Voltage Drops at my Output, whenever Loaded.

Now, with this New Design on the Linear-Series Setup, we will NOT have that Issue Anymore!!...Simply because:

• Inducing/Exciting/Input Field will NEVER, EVER, loose its Strength during its whole Spacetime displacement.
• Based on a Simple R&R (Remove & Replace) Consistently and Accurately Sequential Coils, which:
• Keeps Resistance EQUALLY disbursed along the Main Displacing Inducing Field.
• Hence Currents (Amperage) will remain Equally distributed along the whole Main Displacing Inducing Field.
• Resulting on a very 'STABLE' Field based on its Strength.[/color]

Sorry about making this Post so long, but I wanted to stablish a Deeper comparison between my previous Setup Model (based on Figuera Original Method) and this New Design on the Linear Series Setup.

Regards to All!

Ufopolitics

[kampen]

Reply to Ufopolitics Message # 765

Hello dear friend Ufopolitics,

Thank you very much for taking the time to explain this in such depth.

This is actually one of the most important clarifications so far regarding the transition from your earlier extended Figuera setup toward the new Linear-Series R&R concept.

What I understand now much more clearly is that the critical problem in the previous expanding-field approach was not simply mechanical limitations, but rather the electromagnetic behavior of the field itself during expansion.
As you explained:
when the field was stretched across more sequential coils, the total resistance increased, causing current reduction and therefore weakening the inducing field exactly at the moment where maximum field strength was actually required.

That is a very important insight.
So the old system was effectively doing:

• increasing spatial displacement,
  BUT simultaneously:
• decreasing inducing field strength.

And under load, this weakening of the supply-side inducing field would naturally lead to strong voltage drops at the output side due to the exchange relationship between inducing and induced fields.

Your comparison with conventional rotary generators also makes much more sense now.

In a normal generator:

• the inducing field strength remains essentially constant,
• while only the spatial displacement speed changes.

The field itself does not continuously weaken and strengthen due to changing resistance conditions during operation.
That appears to be one of the major conceptual improvements of your new Linear-Series Remove & Replace (R&R) approach.
Because with the new sequential R&R system:

• resistance remains more uniformly distributed,
• current distribution remains more stable,
• and therefore the inducing field can theoretically maintain a much more constant strength while still translating across spacetime.

That is a very important distinction.
I also appreciate your honesty regarding the earlier experiments:
despite all the flaws and incomplete commutator limitations, you still observed significant output voltage increase relative to the input, even at lower-than-intended RPM operation.

That alone makes the concept worth investigating much more carefully with the new SSD architecture.

And this is exactly why I believe the current Solid-State approach may finally allow the concept to be explored under much more controlled conditions:

• precise timing,
• stable sequencing,
• reduced contact losses,
• no brush instability,
• adjustable displacement speed,
• and much better waveform analysis.

The explanation regarding:
Supply Side (Inducing Field)
versus
Demand Side (Induced Field) is also extremely valuable because it frames the system more as a dynamic field-exchange process rather than a conventional static transformer relationship.

At this stage I believe the most important objective is now:
to experimentally verify whether the new R&R SSD topology can indeed maintain a more stable translating inducing field under load conditions compared to the earlier expanding/retracting Figuera-derived architecture.

Thank you again for sharing these deeper conceptual and practical insights from your earlier experimental work.

Kind regards, Alex

[kampen]

Reply to Ufopolitics message # 765 Part 2.

Ufopolitics is emphasizing a very important theoretical distinction here between:

• Parallel/group-fed coil systems (earlier Figuera-style approaches)
  and
• True series-distributed coil systems (our current SSD linear topology).

The core idea of his statement is:

A true series chain naturally distributes resistance — and therefore current behavior — more uniformly along the translating magnetic field.

• Technically, there is some real engineering logic behind this.

In our current topology:

Code Select Expand

N0 → C1 → N1 → C2 → N2 → C3 → N3 → C4 → N4 → C5 → N5

each coil becomes part of one continuous impedance path.
That means:

• current transitions can become smoother,
• field gradients may become more continuous,
• abrupt localized current concentration is reduced,
• and magnetic displacement may appear more "fluid".

Compared to grouped parallel excitation, this can indeed help create a more stable traveling-field effect.
However, several important real-world factors will still determine whether the field actually remains "equally distributed":
What Helps Stability
1. Equal Coil Resistance
All coils must be:

• same wire gauge,
• same turns count,
• same inductance,
• same physical spacing.

Otherwise current distribution becomes uneven.
2. Transition Timing
This is probably the MOST critical point.
Ufopolitics correctly mentions:

• overlap,
• replacement transition,
• smooth entering/leaving of coils.

If timing is abrupt:

• current discontinuities occur,
• spikes rise sharply,
• magnetic collapse becomes violent.

If overlap is smooth:

• current continuity improves,
• inductive stress lowers,
• field translation becomes cleaner.

This is very similar to:

• commutation overlap in motor drives,
• synchronous rectification timing,
• multiphase power conversion.

3. Coil Coupling
Because our coils are closely spaced:

• mutual inductance will strongly influence current flow,
• adjacent coils may partially sustain neighboring field energy,
• pulse propagation effects may appear.

This is one of the most interesting experimental aspects of our setup.
4. Frequency vs Stability
At low frequency:

• system behavior is easier to analyze,
• current settles more fully.

At higher frequency:

• coils increasingly behave as dynamic coupled inductors,
• timing precision becomes much more important,
• parasitic oscillations can dominate.

So Ufopolitics' "stable field" concept may become more true only after: 

• optimized overlap,
• tuned timing,
• proper damping,
• and sufficient coil resolution.

Important Engineering Reality
The statement:

"currents will remain equally distributed"

is not automatically guaranteed by series topology alone.
Real systems still depend on:

• switching sequence,
• transient suppression,
• inductive coupling,
• parasitic capacitance,
• MOSFET timing,
• and load conditions.

That is exactly why our current experimental roadmap is correct:
must start conservative, measure everything, then scale complexity.
Most Interesting Insight in Ufopolitics Post # 765
This part is probably the key conceptual takeaway:

distributed resistance → distributed current → distributed magnetic displacement

That is essentially describing a Traveling Electromagnetic gradient rather than isolated pulse excitation.
And that is precisely what our SSD selector system is now capable of experimentally investigating.

Kind regards, Alex

[kampen]

@ All Members and Guests,

What is different now compared to earlier stages is that the project is no longer only conceptual, and the architecture has become technically coherent and experimentally buildable.

The most important breakthrough, in my opinion, is that the SSD Selector System is now evolving into a controllable and measurable platform:

• fully floating selectors,
• isolated gate driving,
• true series topology,
• controlled overlap possibilities,
• transient protection,
• and scalable cascade expansion.

That changes everything.
Before, many concepts remained difficult to stabilize because the switching architecture itself introduced uncertainties and hidden interactions.

Now we finally have a path toward systematically testing:

• field displacement,
• pulse propagation,
• current continuity,
• overlap timing,
• and inductive transfer behavior.

I also think our earlier insistence on:

• true sequential displacement,
• higher field resolution,
• and continuous magnetic translation,
  it is becoming much clearer now within this new SSD framework.

At the same time, I believe it is very important that we continue exactly as we are doing now:

• careful measurements,
• conservative voltages,
• low frequencies first,
• waveform analysis,
• and gradual complexity increases.

If the underlying effects are real, then they should reveal themselves progressively and consistently through measurements.

What gives me confidence is not a single expected result, but the fact that the overall system architecture is finally starting to make engineering sense as a complete operating machine.

And that is thanks to the combined contributions from:

• our original field concepts,
• Jos' practical SSD power-electronics corrections,
• and the ongoing integration/testing work.

Now the real experimental phase truly begins.

Kind regards, Alex

[Ufopolitics]

BIPOLAR ROTARY SWITCH 2D ELEVATION CUT VIEW

Ufopolitics

Hello All,

After I designed the above quoted CAD Elevation concept on the BIPOLAR 32 Elements Commutator back at the beginning of this year (January) Ref Post: https://overunitymachines.com/index.php/topic,5.msg2871.html#msg2871

...there were a lot of 'doubts' about being able to achieve ALL These Four Rings Stack to align perfectly well, related to Four Brushes mounted on the shaft...it is actually a very difficult task for me, that I am NOT a professional machinist, plus my Lathe is just a "Mini-Lathe" not for professional use.
Besides, having Four Brushes where ALL of them would be adding DRAG FORCES to the small motor I intend to run it with, as Centrifugal Forces increase with speed...
Also, the time involved on getting all these parts built from scratch...

So, there were basically TWO MAIN downsides to this design:

• Complexity of Design involved, that required only skilled people plus professional equipment that could build it from scratch plus put it together.
• Higher possibility of Failures, because of too many rotating electrical contacts.(four (4) rotating brushes)

Making it a very hard and expensive proyect to build, still with possibilities of failures.

So, I have been 'brainstorming' (for a LONG Time!) about how to eliminate the TWO Continuous Slip Rings by using these two brushes fixed and not being part of the Shaft Assembly, as not being assisted by centrifugal forces.

I have thought about 'splitting ' the shaft in two parts, so one end would be negative and other end positive...as this option would also require a lot of HIGH precision work involved, (basically at the "joint" side plus the insulation) in order to run shaft perfectly centric...as they could NEVER make contact between them (SHORT SOURCE!)...

So, just LAST NIGHT, I came up with a very practical solution, which will do everything I was looking for:

• Eliminate completely the TWO Continuous Slip Rings and their respective TWO brushes NOT running, not spinning by NOT being mounted on shaft.
• Cutting completely off the complexity of previous design requirements on accuracy by over a 50%
• Cutting off about 50% of additional labor, therefore time building it.
• Shaft only will be running the TWO Commutator Brushes, Positive and Negative.
• That above fact eliminates Friction and Drag by 50% to the small motor rotating the whole assembly.
• Much less complications plus much less time on the whole building process.
• The whole Rotary Switch assembly no longer becomes such a LONG Vertical "Tower" of "Six Story Building"
• Reducing Materials (Copper Tubing, Polycarbonate plates, bolts, nuts, washers, etc) by 50%
• Plus ALL the labor to build and put together those parts...
• And the 'list' will keep adding more and more advantages...

So, below, find the same 32 Elements Commutator, but on a completely different design RELATED to ONLY the way Continuous Slip Rings and their Brushes were conceived before:

Ok, so on above image I have SIMPLIFIED Plus COMPACTED A LOT the Design, by JUST ADDING these TWO NEW PARTS, which are;

• Shaft now will be mounted to the Fiberglass Disc (LIGHT Blue Plate) through a Brass Sleeve (On CENTER Facing each others)
• The TWO NEW Slip Rings are now MOUNTED ON the Fiberglass Plate-Disc (Light Blue) NOT making contact -at all- to the steel shaft.
• Upper RED (Cross Section Ring) is the Positive Slip Ring. (2 Red "L's)
• Lower BLUE  (Cross Section Ring) is the Negative Ring. (2 Blue "L''s)
• These TWO Rings are seen here as two "L" , because for the view have a 'Sectional Cut'
• The TWO Slip Ring BRUSHES are now mounted on each End Caps (Upper & Lower) meaning both slip-ring brushes are now fixed and no longer rotating with Shaft.
• We can now compare with previous design being quoted here...and see the RADICAL DIFFERENCE between the Two Designs.

Now, on below image, I have deleted, on purpose -just for better understanding- the Two Commutator Rings and their TWO respective Brushes (Positive and Negative)

Now, it is understood that each slip-ring will now carry the TWO Electrical Polarities (+/-), which would be simply taken into each brush respectively through a wire. (Shown on previous image, not here, since commutator brushes are not shown)

VERY IMPORTANT NOTE HERE:

• I have shown both Slip-rings as WIDER than the Brass Mounting on opposite side, just to differentiate that are Two separate parts.
• BUT, that is NOT the way they go!!...They are about the same size, except by a slight difference on Inner Shaft Area is wider than shaft for Slip-Rings.
• In order that Slip-Rings NEVER make contact with COMMON Shaft (Or it will definitively SHORT OUT!)

The way these TWO Parts are set (Brass Shaft Piece that bolts to Fiberglass Mounting Plate (Light Blue here) PLUS the Slip-Ring are based on a Three Bolt Design each, separated by 120 Degrees.

Where they alternate (are rotated by 60 degrees to mount them) in order NOT to coincide on their mounting holes-bolts.

In order to see how these Two Parts Mate, it requires to be done on a 2D plus a 3D CAD...Perspective and different Angle Views.

I will do that on following days...as it will take me time to make it.
First I will do sooner the 2D, upper and Elevation Views.
Building on 3D (MAYA) will take me weeks, or months, so I may just do a simple Perspective View using 2D software.

It will also have Three Aluminum Fan Fins, (NOT SHOWN on BOTH Images here) which would be mounted on the Slip-Ring Three Bolts, Plus another Three Bolts from Fiberglass plate to ends of the Three Aluminum Fins,(to prevent Fins to move with rotation) as these Fins will also serve as HEAT SINKERS for the Slip-Rings possible heating.

Plus their typical job, (Fan) which is to cool off commutators, as dust off any carbon debris.

Anyways, I am very excited by this new design, since I know it will be easier to build by ALL our Great Builders Out there!!
Plus, I can finish it faster now!

PD: One of the HARDEST PARTS of this build, is to Cut-Rectify -on the Lathe- the INNER WALL (Inner Diameter) of the Large Copper Cylinder!! And honestly it is very hard -for me- because I do not have all the required Alignment Tools to make this tubing ROATATE perfectly aligned, and not wobbling at all!!
Besides, using an inner cut, with a LONG ARM Blade is VERY RISKY!!...As it is very easy to screw up the whole thing if it gets stock because of a too hard push on the blade!

Another issue on Internal Cylinder Cuts: VISIBILTY!!...You can barely see inside Copper Cylinder. (I have to use a specific light aiming inside...but there is a point where blade goes off sight completely when blade is all the way in.

So, now I will be putting together the rest of the CAD's to better understand how these FOUR NEWS pieces are designed (and build)

Regards to All

Ufopolitics