FIGUERA'S AETHER MAGNETIC FIELDS LINEAR PUMP, REVIVED

[kampen]

The second rendering presents a fully transparent assembly view showing:
Image below: TRANSPARENT Full Assembly

 

• Dual stationary 32-segment commutators
• Positive and negative PCB output rings
• Rotating brush carriers sweeping from the inside diameter outward
• Positive and negative slip-ring assemblies
• Rotor structure and support columns
• Exploded assembly views and terminal mapping

One particularly important aspect now clearly visible is the implementation of the annular PCB boards mounted directly to the commutators. 
These PCB rings replace a large amount of discrete wiring and consolidate the 32-segment connections into eight final outputs per commutator, greatly simplifying assembly and future replication.

The renderings also reflect Ufopolitics' recent clarification regarding rotational direction. 
Now, whether the assembly is driven CW or CCW (using the shaft convention viewed from the power-input side), the sequential excitation outputs remain functionally identical. 
The quadrant order reverses, but the final excitation sequence delivered to the generator coils remains unchanged.

Going forward, the next planned renderings will focus on:
• Transparent current-flow animations
• PCB layer routing detail views
• Segment-by-segment commutation progression
• Quadrant transition visualization
• Builder-friendly simplified assembly drawings
• Manufacturing-oriented commutator dimension drawings


I would especially appreciate feedback from Ufopolitics and other builders regarding dimensional proportions, brush carrier simplification, commutator inner diameter sizing, and overall manufacturability before the next revision cycle begins.

Many thanks to Ufopolitics for continuously sharing the MAYA CAD developments and design insights that make these visualizations possible.

Regards, Alex

[kampen]

Subject Ref.: Related to Specs on how to build them robustly, to withstand all environmental circumstances:
 
I leave that up to you, since you know all the details related to vibration and Power handling versus obtaining a reliable final result.
We need to calculate these boards capable of handling up to 200 Volts at 2 Amps Max. But we could always exceed those specs to play safe.
 
For 200 V / 2 A max, I would design the PCB with a generous safety margin.
Recommended board specs:
Electrical

• Design voltage rating: 300–400 V DC minimum
• Design current rating: 5 A minimum, even if the expected max is 2 A
• Copper thickness: 2 oz minimum, preferably 3–4 oz
• Trace width: at least 2.5–3.0 mm for 2 A, but I would use 5 mm or more where space allows
• Use large copper pours/bus traces instead of thin tracks
• Use multiple vias in parallel where the current changes layer

Clearance/creepage

• Minimum clearance between unrelated high-voltage traces: 2.5–3 mm
• Safer target: 4–5 mm
• Add isolation slots where traces must pass close together
• Keep positive and negative routing well separated

Mechanical robustness

• FR4 board, 1.6–2.0 mm thick
• Through-hole plated pads for all commutator bolt connections
• Large annular pads around every bolt
• Use locking washers or thread-locking compound
• Add strain relief for the 8 output wires
• Avoid relying on solder joints for mechanical strength

Environmental protection

• Conformal coating after testing
• Prefer silicone or urethane coating, not a brittle coating
• Keep brush carbon dust away from PCB traces
• Add physical dust shields if possible
• Use tinned or gold-plated pads if oxidation is a concern

Best recommendation
 Use a 2-layer heavy-copper PCB as the minimum. If the budget allows, a 4-layer PCB would be better:

• Layer 1: routing
• Layer 2: reinforced bus paths
• Layer 3: return/group routing
• Layer 4: routing/output pads

REMARK:
 For a 200 V / 2 A system, I would NOT design the boards exactly for 2 A.
I would design them for 300–400 V and 5 A continuous, with wide traces, large pads, reinforced vias, and conformal coating.

This gives a much safer and more durable result.

Best Regards, Alex

[Ufopolitics]

Hello All,
Hello @kampen ,

Hello dear friend,

I am working on the PCB detailed circuiting for Upper & Lower board layers (we will just need Two(2) Layers here or Two main circuits.

I am first making these Design on MAYA 3D modeling, so I can Zoom as work in very close and accurate detail.

NOW, There are around 30 VERTICAL PINS on this design, which JOIN Upper Circuit with Lower one.
And, the way I am making these Pins Locations (for easier understanding of the CAD)
Is by adding smaller copper rings wherever a Vertical pin needs to be added for both layers.
These "o" copper rings are perfectly aligned, in order that when we set the Two layers one on. top of the other, we get a clear view where these Vertical Pins gets installed.

See Zoomed Image below of Vertical Pins I am relating to:

My question is, since you are more familiar with the Manufacturing Process of PCB's...

1- Does the PCB Manufacturer Install these vertical pins between both layers by Cold Pressing them?

2-Or the Manufacturer just perforate all these holes where there are these "o" copper rings (where vertical pins goes) and then just add the copper pins (or wires) and solder them on top and bottom ends of both layers?

3- Or is there any other way they take care of joining Points between Two Layers?

Either way will work fine, however, the soldering option seems more 'Robust' to me than just cold pressing pins between both layers.

On the option #2, if manufacturer just drill All Pin holes and the vertical wires could be added by the customer later on...

Can you check this two options as searching for the cheapest one?

It is very simple for us to just add these vertical wires ourselves, solder on both ends and cut them, say with 16 or 14 gauge?

My worry is that by just cold pressing these copper pins they could come loose with prolonged use?

Let's remember that typical PCB Construction is conceived to be placed at environments where there is not vibrations...

And we will have certain vibrations plus High Power running through these circuits.


Again, many, many thanks for the work you and your team are doing here!!!


Regards

Ufopolitics

[kampen]

Reply to Message # 802

For these PCBs, I would NOT rely on loose cold-pressed pins.

The standard PCB-manufacturing method for joining layers is plated-through holes/vias: the manufacturer drills the holes and plates the inside wall with copper so the top and bottom layers are electrically connected.
This is normal, reliable PCB practice.

For these PCBs, I would recommend:
IMAGE: Vertical Connections Options between PCB Layers

Best option:
 Use large plated-through vias, preferably several in parallel at each vertical connection point.
For higher robustness:

• Use large via holes, for example, 0.8–1.2 mm finished hole
• Use multiple vias per current path
• Ask for 2 oz or 3 oz copper
• Use plated-through holes
• Optionally fill/solder the via barrels afterward for extra current capacity
• Add conformal coating after testing

For vibration and 200 V / 2 A operation, the safest practical approach is:
The manufacturer drills and copper-plates the vias, then we optionally reinforce the high-current vias with solder or short copper wire pins.

I would avoid press-fit/cold-only pins unless using proper press-fit PCB terminals designed for that purpose.

Press-fit can be reliable, but it requires controlled hole tolerances, correct compliant pins, and proper insertion tooling. It is not the cheapest or simplest DIY method.
For insulation spacing, at 200 V, I would not use tiny clearances. IPC-2221 style guidance puts 151–300 V external conductor spacing at around 1.25 mm minimum, but for this project I would target 3–5 mm wherever possible, because of vibration, carbon dust, humidity, and inductive spikes.

I recommend:
Use normal PCB plated-through vias for all layer-to-layer connections.
For high-current vertical points, design them as large copper-plated holes and optionally solder short copper pins/wires through them afterward.
That gives the reliability of professional PCB manufacturing plus the mechanical strength of reinforced soldered connections.

Best regards, Alex

[Ufopolitics]

@kampen

Hello dear friend,

Many thanks for the so fast response!!
Plus adding such graphical detailed rendered images!!

So, the Option B, I also agree would be best!
We could reinforce the Vías with 14 gauge and solder both ends/both sides.

As Option C: Double vertical vías-pins would double cost. (I imagine) because of double labor, double materials.

Great!!
Many thanks!!

Regards

Ufopolitics