FIGUERA'S AETHER MAGNETIC FIELDS LINEAR PUMP, REVIVED

[Ufopolitics]

@ Ufopolitics,

Thank you for the video.
This clearly shows the required sequence.
Now I understand that regardless of the driver used, the outcome must always be exactly the same as demonstrated.
The key point is that the center bulb (#8, counting from either side) remains ON at all times, acting as a constant reference.

Viewing the combined light output of the eight bulbs as the magnetic field volume makes the intent clear: the sequence defines the field shape, not the driver.
This is a very helpful clarification.

Regards, Alex

Thanks dear friend!

At least ALL the work was worthy!

It may look like a "simple" and "easy to make" video at simple sight....right?

Well, it was NOT!

First I had to make the Light bulbs...which is not big deal, because you make one and then duplicate it...

However, each "Filament" must be made of different, individual materials...in order that each one could be programmed separate from the rest on the ON and OFF Timings...to obtain the desired light effect:...

Except - of course- number eight coil...that stays ON all the time...

After all sequences are verified, image by image, time by time...then go into the "Batch Rendering"...
After all batch is finished....then it goes through Four more Programs...FCheck, Adobe After Effects, and finally the converter from AVI to MP4...then to upload it in YouTube...
Took almost the whole day...as there were not good results, takes, footage, etc...as I want it be.
And still, I did  the final video in not "HD" (740) to process it faster. 

Anyways, am very glad you can see 'visually' what it should look like...a simple test with 15 light bulbs connected all in series to ANY Driver.

Regards

Ufopolitics

[kampen]

@ Ufopolitics,

I can clearly see now that what looks simple at first glance was anything but.
The amount of work behind making each bulb and filament independently controllable, verifying the timing frame by frame, and then processing through multiple programs is very evident.
The result does its job perfectly: it makes the sequence visually!
Seeing it this way removes any doubt about how the behavior must work, independent of the driver used.
Your effort was absolutely worthwhile this visual reference is very valuable.

Ref.: Engineering Mechanical Commutator 
Send me the parameters below so I can compute your numbers precisely.
Give me these three values (even rough is fine):

• Target RPM (min–max)
• Coil current A (or supply voltage + coil resistance)
• Brush face size (e.g., 10×6 mm) and estimated brush mass (or material + dimensions)

Then I can give you:
>recommended spring preload (N)
>expected pressure vs RPM
>a brush material pick with and "why"
>a simple commutation wiring diagram tied to POS.SEQ/NEG.SEQ.

Regards, Alex

[Ufopolitics]

@ Ufopolitics,

I can clearly see now that what looks simple at first glance was anything but.
The amount of work behind making each bulb and filament independently controllable, verifying the timing frame by frame, and then processing through multiple programs is very evident.
The result does its job perfectly: it makes the sequence visually!
Seeing it this way removes any doubt about how the behavior must work, independent of the driver used.
Your effort was absolutely worthwhile this visual reference is very valuable.

Hello dear friend,

Great!...Yes, the whole scene - for that short video- was not only based on a simple black and white "moving lights" within "clear spheres"...
This  short video could have also being done by getting eight point lights and moving them back and forth...However, that was NOT the  purpose, as bulbs are fixed, as are their lights.
And if you've noticed on my short video, each Group ending bulbs turns ON & OFF according to displacement direction of movement.
Exacty the way that our Magnetic Field will displace/move..."with all coils fixed, in place"...

Ref.: Engineering Mechanical Commutator
Send me the parameters below so I can compute your numbers precisely.
Give me these three values (even rough is fine):

• Target RPM (min–max)
• Coil current A (or supply voltage + coil resistance)
• Brush face size (e.g., 10×6 mm) and estimated brush mass (or material + dimensions)

Then I can give you:
>recommended spring preload (N)
>expected pressure vs RPM
>a brush material pick with and "why"
>a simple commutation wiring diagram tied to POS.SEQ/NEG.SEQ.

Regards, Alex

Ok, now before I proceed with spec's, let me say - something you may know already- but, to remind you that this is NOT a "typical/common" Commutator Brush Assembly...actually, this type of setup, does not exist out there on the market.

Figuera had to order his controller assembly to be built in Germany...at those times.

A dear friend who is a Member here, asked me to make for him the CAD to order his 32 elements commutator to be built, according to his measurements...and when he gave the CAD to the manufacturer...he was perplex...looking at it...then ask him: what is this 'thing' used for?...what 'application' it goes on?

Why I  am saying this?...because these type of setup is opposite 180º to any typical commutator-brush out there.

***********************************

SPEC'S:

1- Target RPM= Idle: 2500, Operating: 3000 TO 3600 plus, which it should be able to reach up to 4000 RPM's

2- Supply Voltage/Current: First on 50V/ 1A, Second trial : up to 120V/2A (Real Coils Group Resistance is 56-60 Ohms.

3- The brushes -that I found 'in stock' (4) identical- are 20 mm length, height 4.5 mm, width 6 mm, and are made of Carbon/Copper Alloy.
This brushes are very 'light'...as weight/mass.
The Carbon-Copper Alloy make them a bit harder (last longer), as they make better contact because of the copper within (less resistance)

4- Majority of pressure I will leave it to the Centrifugal forces...actually this design just requires a spring that just keeps brush in place without much pressure.

So, the springs will be pretty light on pressure.

Now, compared to the contact elements size they are relatively smaller than one (1) contact, and still would be 'Make Before Brake'.

However, I am considering a possibility of 'Angle Adjustment' in order to:

1- Extend the contacting face.

2- Reduce a bit Centrifugal Forces as to 'ease' rotation.

So below are the two possibility I have in consideration on brush settings (I am making the brush housings in a way that they can be mounted in different positionings, and checked which one works out better at bench test, related to a few parameters...like torque added to small motor, reduction of centrifugal force limits, contacts check (bulbs) etc :

The 'Typical' are the Perpendicular Brush setings:

This setting applies full centrifugal Forces, but, it reduces the Face Contact area to strictly its size (4.5 X 6 mm)

The Angular settings:

Here I will test searching for the 'sweet angle' that complies with both desired points: good contact/ ease rotation-reduce torque.

We have to realize there would be Four (4) Total Brushes working here...so, we can not go too big and wide on brushes contact area and size as weight.

Now the connection's Diagram I already upload it here, even with Flat Commutator type it will serve for the terminals circuit connections, as they would be identical:

I hope you could work with these spec's.

Thanks for your help!

Regards

Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hello All,

On a brief analysis of this Linear Series Generator I am working on, relating to the possibility of Commutator-Brush Sparking/Arcing...

Looking at it in detail,  we have each Group of Coils having a Total Resistance of 56 to 60 Ohms, composed of Eight Coils connected in series, where each Coil have a resistance of around 6.50 Ohms.

So, everytime one Group switches into the next Group, only one single coil gets disconnected, as another one enters the circuit, which does not add reverse voltages.

It is just the disconnected coil which  generates reversed voltage.

Based on that fact, we can do some simple calculations:

Since on each Group all its Eight [8] Coils are connected in series, then the Total Voltage to Group gets divided by the number of coils. to obtain Voltage per single Coil.

Therefore, if we are applying a Total Input Voltage of 60 Volts per Group, divided by 8 Total Coils, it results on 7.5 Volts per each coil.

Even though the currents will remain the same (around 1 amp on this example) through the whole series circuit, this very low voltage per coil will not build a strong Magnetic Field on that single coil, like comparing it with the whole Group Field receiving 60 Volts.

The Reversed Voltage is directly dependant -on its majority- on the Magnetic Field Strength that we are disconnecting...

So, in my opinion, we will have very low -normal- sparking on this Setup, if any at all.

We will see this on real testing...

Regards

Ufopolitics

[kampen]

@ Ufopolitics,

One test that will settle it quickly:
Bench test exactly what you plan, but add one measurement:
>Put a scope probe across the opening segment/brush] (or across the coil being removed).
>Compare:

• • make-before-break overlap
  • intentionally reduce overlap (closer to break-before-make)

If the spikes jump dramatically when overlap is reduced, you have confirmed the real driver is (dI/dt), not the 7.5 V steady-state.

Regards, Alex