FIGUERA'S AETHER MAGNETIC FIELDS LINEAR PUMP, REVIVED

[Ufopolitics]

Hello All,

Unfortunately, I am having some issues with the srevers I have contracted...
It seems "new owners" avid for money are taking over...so I get to be billed EVERY FREAKING MONTH!!
No matter if I have paid IN FULL PREVIOUS BILL FOR SEVERAL MONTHS AHEAD!!

So, no matter if I pay "in time"...they will always "generate" a new bill...

Then ALL SERVERS will run slower...

I am not going to have any other option, than to start choosing for a New Server Company...

This will cause some future interruptions...

So, if you guys see we are not in line...please be patient!

Migrating to New Servers implies a LOT of DATA WORK!
Plus New $ Charges...

If you could help by DONATIONS it would be great!

THANKS SO MUCH!!

Regards

Ufopolitics

[kampen]

SSD_3_Coil_setup (Q1-Q3-Q2) Measurement_Protocol_Updated

Hello, Dear Ufopolitics,

I would like to share with you the latest measurement results from our SSD 3-Coil setup (Q1–Q3–Q2).
Guido Electronicus (staff member) has spent considerable time systematically measuring the coils, Q1/Q2 switching, the Main Secondary under load, Q3 bias current, and different deadtime/overlap settings.

I have attached both his latest Excel measurement file and the updated English measurement protocol, so that you can see the actual measured values and test conditions.

There are a few results that I think are particularly interesting.
First, deadtime has a very strong influence on the Main Secondary output.

With the present setup at 120 Hz and a 25 Ω Main load, +2000 µs deadtime produced approximately 0.407 W Main output with 1.87 W PSU-1 input.
Reducing the deadtime to +250 µs increased PSU-1 input considerably, while Main output decreased.

At zero deadtime and with ordinary digital overlap, the Main output decreased even further.
So, at least with the present electronic switching method, simply increasing ON-time or allowing Q1 and Q2 to overlap does not improve the Main output.

However, I think we should make an important distinction here between simple gate overlap, where Q1 and Q2 are simultaneously ON, and a controlled current crossover, where the current in Q1 gradually decreases while the current in Q2 gradually increases.

These are not necessarily the same magnetic condition.
Guido will add oscilloscope images of these current transitions so that we can examine this in more detail.
The second interesting result concerns Q3.
With a fixed 25 Ω Main load, 120 Hz, and +2000 µs deadtime, Guido performed a Q3 bias sweep.
In CC mode, from approximately 0.2 A to 0.5 A Q3 current, the Main output remained almost unchanged at about 0.404–0.407 W, even though PSU-2 supplied progressively more power to Q3.

Therefore, under these particular test conditions, we do not yet see a measurable improvement in Main output from simply applying a constant DC bias to Q3.
This does not mean that Q3 has no role in the concept.
It only tells us what happens with a static Q3 bias under this particular timing condition.
This is why I am especially interested in your view regarding the intended function of Q3.

Should Q3, in your concept, primarily provide a constant magnetic bias/reference field, or should its magnetic field also dynamically increase/decrease during the Q1→Q2 and Q2→Q1 transitions?

This distinction is becoming important because our measurements currently indicate that timing, frequency, and the actual current transitions have a much stronger effect on the Main output than the magnitude of a static Q3 bias.
Guido has already performed Frequency scans as well and will add these results, together with additional oscilloscope captures.
We therefore do not want to change the hardware prematurely.

First, we want to understand what the present setup is actually doing.
The Main Secondary load tests are also useful.
With the present conditions, the highest measured output in the tested load range occurs around 25–50 Ω, at approximately 0.39–0.40 W.
Furthermore, as the Main is loaded more heavily, PSU-1 input increases, showing a clear reflected interaction between the Secondary load and the primary system.

For me, the important point at this stage is that we now have reproducible measurements rather than relying only on assumptions about how the magnetic field should behave.

I would therefore very much appreciate your interpretation of these results, particularly:
What magnetic/current behaviour do you expect from Q1, Q3, and Q2 during one complete field displacement cycle?

If possible, a simple sketch showing the intended relative currents:
IQ1(t), IQ3(t), IQ2(t)during the Q1→Q2 transition and back again would be extremely useful.
We could then reproduce that specific condition electronically and compare your intended field displacement with what we are currently measuring.

Please see the attached Excel measurement results and the updated English measurement protocol for the complete data.
Many thanks again for your help and for sharing your ideas with us.

We will continue measuring step by step.

Regards,
Alex / Kampen

first results SSD-3-Coils - 20260929.xlsx
SSD_3_Coil_Measurement_Protocol_Updated_Guido_v3_20260929_EN (1).docx

[kampen]

Subject: SSD 3-Coil – First Measurement Results and Updated Test Protocol

Hello, Dear Ufopolitics,
I would like to share with you the latest measurement results from our SSD 3-Coil setup (Q1–Q3–Q2).

first results SSD-3-Coils - 20260929.xlsx
SSD_3_Coil_Measurement_Protocol_Updated_Guido_v3_20260929_EN (1).docx