Hello All,

Hello @kampen,

Ok, I finally decipher where the 'lack of communication' was...and I must quote here the post #17 from June 10, 2024 from the Driver Development between Kampen and me:

https://overunitymachines.com/index.php/topic,66.msg1524.html#msg1524

Where there is a video that Alex (Kampen) sent me and I uploaded to my You Tube Channel:


On that video he is pulsing EIGHT 24V/5W Incandescent light Bulbs, and they DO follow a Sequential Pattern...

However, we never exchange the Bulbs connection Diagram with FET Boards.

So, after trying for a while how this was done, I finally realize how it was originally designed to be connected, then I did a video (just now) to test and verify it:


We can now see (finally!) a "Sequential Pattern"...

However, only done with Eight [8] Bulbs and each bulb is connected INDEPENDENTLY from the others, NOT ALL IN SERIES like is supposed to be.

If I connect the Groups this way, everytime we will be COLLAPSING each FULL Group to turn ON the next FULL Group...and YES, HV Spikes are going to be HUGE, everytime a WHOLE Group turns OFF!!

And that is NOT the way the FIGUERA COMMUTATOR does it. Nor the way I have designed it to be done on this LINEAR SERIES GENERATOR.

We are supposed to ONLY turn OFF ONE (1) Coil out of the WHOLE Group of Coils (in my setup a Total of EIGHT Coils), and ENTER (TURN ON) the following SINGLE Coil (1) on Sequence, according to the sequence direction (Right or Left).

This way there will ALWAYS BE at least SIX Coils ALIVE (ON) on every step, as the Field will NEVER COLLAPSE...THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED!!

And the collapse of just ONE COIL will NEVER return a HV Spike, when compared to Collapsing the whole Group of ALL Coils.

Later on I will make the Diagrams for this INDEPENDENT Eight Light Bulbs connection compared with the ALL IN SERIES 15 Light Bulbs that we actually need to be done.

This was entirely a lack of communication or translation issue between Kampen and me when we were designing/developing this drivers.

As now I also realize that doing it the way I needed to be, it could be causing a "short circuit" between NFET and PFET Boards....and thanks GOD it did not damage the boards by me connecting it all in series.

In conclusion: Kampen and his Team did an excellent job!...as now I am realizing there was NOT any problems with the Logic Board (no leaks to Gates) as there is also nothing wrong on the FET Boards (Source to Drain leakage)...NOPE, the Driver was designed and built perfectly well...just that it was not designed as it really works on the SERIES CONNECTIONS...
Maybe this can not be achieved with Electronic Drivers...I do not know...

But I am SURE the Mechanical Rotary Dual Commutator CAN DO IT exactly like I need it.

Maybe with @lfarrand Bipolar Switches it can be done...HOWEVER, the Logic Board have to be redesigned as welll.

Regards to All

Ufopolitics

Reply to message #530

Hello dear friend Ufopolitics,

This is actually a very important step forward and well spotted.

Seeing a **clear sequential pattern** once the bulbs are connected independently confirms that the **logic and switching concept itself is working**.

That alone clears up a lot of uncertainty, and it also explains why earlier tests were misleading when everything was tied in series.

Your point about **not collapsing the entire group** is the key.

Turning OFF just one coil while turning ON the next keeping most of the group alive at all times makes complete sense if the goal is to avoid field collapse and large HV spikes.

That distinction between *group collapse* and *single-element handover* is crucial, and it is now very clear why the "all-in-series" bulb test could never represent the intended behavior.

I also think it is very important what you concluded: the fact that the driver behaves correctly in the independent-bulb test strongly suggests there was **no leakage problem** in the logic or FET boards.

This really does look like a **connection/topology interpretation issue**, not a design or build fault.

Whether this exact "one-out / one-in while the rest stay ON" behavior can be implemented cleanly in Solid-State without creating unintended current paths is a still open question.

A mechanical dual commutator can certainly do it in a very explicit and observable way, which makes it an excellent reference point.

Once that behavior is nailed down mechanically then it becomes much easier to judge how (or if) it should be translated electronically possibly with a different logic approach, or something like Lee's Bipolar Mosfet switching as you mentioned.

In any case, this is good progress.

Now You have narrowed the problem significantly, clarified what *does* work, and identified precisely where the mismatch was.

This is not a setback this is understanding.

Looking forward to the diagrams and sent them when you are ready.

Regards, Alex

@kampen,

Yes my dear friend, I understand now, as I have expressed on my previous post, that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Driver(s) you have designed.

Meaning, there are NO "leaks" from Logic Board to Gates...or NO "leaks" from Sources to Drains on the FET Boards...nothing wrong at all!

It was just designed according to INDEPENDENT PULSING for Eight Coils or Eight Groups there off.

As I understand now the 150V Spikes you were getting when pulsing even with 12V...

As I understand also that you were pulsing by individual coils and not based on groups...

Anyways, you are right, this was just a misunderstanding from the beginning of the driver's design...versus what I have been trying to explain.

And yes, it just a step forward on this development, where now there would not be any more doubts on the way we need these drivers to work.

Your work was done excellent, according to the way you understood it.

Ok, below are the image of the two Concepts of Drivers:

On top is the way you have designed, and below is the way that we all need it.


You can touch the image to make it larger (1200 pixel width)

And after making MY Circuit Diagram...I remember when you told me it will be a "short circuit"...and now I realize it, that the PFET and NFET can NOT be "interconnected" between them directly.

Besides, I also noticed that in order for Negative feed from NFET Board to supply power to the SEVEN Coils on RIGHT, it would have to go through ALL LEFT SIDE Coils...Not a viable solution.

Or perhaps there is a way to "REWIRE" this whole thing differently, with what we have?...I will fry my brain (again) on this...after I take a "brake" to cool it off.

Anyways, I do believe it would be possible to build this Solid State driver the way we need it...it just need a lot of "brain frying".

The Bipolar Switches are NOT the decisive part of this new design, as they are just the "Executing Switches", however they offer great advantages over the NFET and PFET Design, since can work either DC polarity with only NFET's, which are much better than "pairing" PFET's and NFET's...plus another big advantage -of Bipolar Switches- is that with just one wire signal we can excite BOTH Switches (Common Gates per Two Switches +/-)

However, I believe the major work lies on the Logic Board Design as the way it will select only specific coils of the group to be turned off as others to be turned on, while keeping the Majority of Group Coils ON...That is where -I believe- the New Challenging job is.

Now, building this new Commutator would also be a challenging mechanical and engineering design...because it will have a total of Four (4) Brushes, T for Continuous Sleep Rings to send constant power to the other Two Brushes that would be commutating between elements...

Therefore, putting it all together from scratch, it is a job that will NOT happen in a "couple of days"...

But we will get there...no matter which way finishes first.

Regards

Ufopolitics

Hello All,

Hello my dear friend @kampen 

Ok, I have made the First Eight Sequences of Groups of Eight Light Bulbs (instead of Coils) we need on one Image below.

As this would be the Primary way to check/test that the Driver is working correctly, first with Incandescent Light Bulbs.

It is understood that the "RETURN" Stage (Not show on image) would be the REVERSE of this Eight Steps from Left to Right, meaning from Group 8 back to Group 1, as stated on the lower image Text with an arrow pointing to Left:




Please note that Light Bulb #8 would be the Center Coil on the Linear Series Assembly, as it is the ONLY ONE that is always ON.

Again, you can click on image to make it larger (1200 pixels width)

Regards

Ufopolitics

Hello all,

I hope I can help a bit. Figuera patent says to use resistance, it is switching resistance not power. Power is ON all time and increased resistance sequential will just not feed certain coils with full power, only lower the voltage.
At least this is in one of the patents where turns of resistance are described.

Using transistors you need to effective change the path of output (emitter) through resistance or turn on between full on and partial on I think ... I am not brilliant with electronics.

Anyway for sequential switching as desired while keeping on all coils, it means one coil receive full voltage while all others get only a fraction. How you can achieve this ? I don't know, electronics still have some mysteries for me, I prefer more primitive setups ... coils are not toasted as easy as electronics.

I guess, trying to inject a second signal/impulse on top of the continuous signal may be a bit more difficult than using resistance to drop the voltage.

This is another way to modulate inductance using resistance without diodes. Switching ON each coil or group of 2 coils without resistance while keeping ON full power.

Good luck all.

Again, please delete if my message is confusing or inapropriate.