Reply to Message # 879

Hello, my dear friend @Ufopolitics,

Thank you very much for your detailed review and for investing the time to carefully correct my previous diagram. 
I sincerely appreciate your effort and your continued support of this project.

I have carefully studied all the corrections and additions you made in Message #879, and I agree that they significantly improve the clarity and technical consistency of the documentation.

The improvements I particularly appreciate are:

• The corrected Window-Group 1, 2, and 3 connections.
• Showing the sequential coils Q1 through Q5 as a true series chain before the switching contacts.
• Correctly matching all Window-Group connections to the proper coil terminals.
• Removing the incorrect N6 designation.
• Clearly defining the switching contacts:
  
  • N0, N1 and N2 = Positive (+)
  • N3, N4 and N5 = Negative (−)
• Defining each Window-Group by its corresponding Positive and Negative contacts:
  
  • Window Group 1 → N0 (+) and N3 (−)
  • Window Group 2 → N1 (+) and N4 (−)
  • Window Group 3 → N2 (+) and N5 (−)
• Adding the Start (S) and End (E) identification for all seven coils.
• Showing the polarity on every sequential coil terminal.
• Including the complete FC1 and FC2 feedback output connections.
• Adding the resistance values for all sequential coils.

I fully agree that adopting these conventions as a standard will make future drawings much easier to read and will reduce the amount of explanatory text required.
Following your recommendations, I have already started preparing a Version 4.0 Master Engineering Drawing. 

The objective is to combine:

• the high-quality 3D mechanical rendering,
• your corrected electrical connections and switching groups,
• The Main Center Secondary Coil,
• the three electrically independent circuits,
• The complete FC1 and FC2 feedback circuit with bridge rectifier and DC feedback supply,
• And complete Start/End identification for every coil.

I believe this will become the definitive engineering reference for the SSD 5-Coil Project and will make construction and future discussions much clearer for everyone following the project.

Thank you again, my dear friend, for your patience, your careful reviews, and for sharing your extensive experience. 
Your detailed observations continue to improve both the design and the documentation of this project.

Kind regards, Alex @kampen

Hello All,

Recently I conducted a deep study on these Linear Induction Systems, that I have developed from the original Figuera's Method of 1908...
According to ALL my previous testing on the Linear-Series Generator, I came up with the development that on these Systems there are :




On the Drawing above, I am showing a SIDE ELEVATION SECTIONAL-CUT VIEW* of the Five Sequential Coils setup that @kampen is currently building.

* A "Sectional-Cut View" (for those not familiar with Architectural and Mechanical Drawings Views), means that I have 'literally' LONGITUDINALLY SLICED the WHOLE ASSEMBLY in TWO PARTS, then TAKEN AWAY JUST THE FRONT SLICED PART.
Meaning that we are seeing ALL COILS, STEEL CORE AND END PLATES BEEN CUT IN HALF AND ARE SHOWING THEIR INNER CENTRAL COMPONENTS.
So, on ALL COILS shown above, we will see an UPPER and LOWER PORTION of them:

• On the CENTER of the Assembly we can see the MAIN LONGITUDINAL STEEL CORE.
• At each EXTREME ENDS (Right & Left) we see the TWO END STEEL PLATES.
• On the LEFT we can see COIL FC1 (CUT IN HALF) therefore, we see it in TWO PARTS: UPPER and LOWER CUT SIDES. (Brown-Gold Color)
• The same View we have on FC2 , BUT on the RIGHT SIDE.
• On the CENTER we have the MAIN CENTER SECONDARY COIL (GREEN), also CUT IN HALF, so we have an UPPER & LOWER SIDE.
• As we can see ALL SEQUENTIAL COILS Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 & Q5, also CUT IN HALF therefore we see their UPPER and LOWER PARTS (White)

So, after you have seen as understood ALL MAIN COMPONENTS OF THIS SECTIONAL-CUT VIEW, then I will proceed to explain the Basic Magnetic Field Displacement:


On TOP of Assembly we can see :

• WINDOW-GROUP #1 (in RED) that includes Sequential Coils Q1, Q2, Q3. (THIS IS THE LEFT END GROUP)
• WINDOW-GROUP #2 (in GREEN) that includes Sequential Coils Q2, Q3, Q4 (THIS IS THE CENTER GROUP)
• WINDOW-GROUP #3 (in BLUE) that includes Sequential Coils Q3, Q4, Q5. (THIS IS THE RIGHT END GROUP)

As you have noticed, I have changed the previous WINDOWS-GROUPS COLOR SEQUENCE from RBG to RGB, and there is a SPECIFIC REASON why I did that, I will explain when we enter the Magnetic Field Polarization here...

Now, on the STEEL CENTER CORE, there is a LARGE LIGHT BLUE DUAL ARROW where at LEFT END shows the LETTER "S" in RED, and on the RIGHT END shows the LETTER "N" in BLUE.
This LIGHT BLUE ARROW REPRESENTS THE TOTAL FIELD LONGITUDINAL DISPLACEMENT THROUGH ALL THREE STEPS.
AS ALWAYS KEEPING the Same Magnetic Polarities in ALL THREE WINDOWS-GROUPS STEPS. (NEVER REVERSES MAGNETIC POLARITIES DURING OPERATION)
This Windows-Groups Steps are represented INSIDE STEEL CORE BY THREE(3) FINE LINE DUAL ARROWS:

• RED ARROW represnts WINDOW-GROUP #1
• GREEN ARROW represents WINDOW-GROUP #2
• BLUE ARROW represents WINDOW-GROUP #3

And if you have noticed, these three arrows extends EXACTLY TO THE SIZE OF THE SEQUENTIAL "3Q#" COILS INVOLVED.
Now, these Sequences develops in a very short and simple way:  1, 2, 3 then RETURNS AS 3, 2, 1, where BOTH SEQUENCES REPRESENTS ONE (1) FULL CYCLE.
HOWEVER, IN ORDER TO ANALYZE THE INDUCTION MECHANISMS WE WILL ONLY NEED TO SEE HALF OF A CYCLE, OR 1, 2, 3 STEPS.


The CENTER MAIN SECONDARY COIL RECEIVES A CONSTANT LONGITUDINAL (ALONG STEEL CORE)  INDUCTION, which is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to the MAGNETIC FIELD DISPLACEMENT caused by the THREE (3) SEQUENTIAL STEPS.

NOW, the property of this particular Induction causes that ONCE MAIN SECONDARY IS LOADED with a significant Load, the Generated Induced Field ACTS DIRECTLY OPPOSING the SEQUENTIAL FIELD DISPLAMENT ON ALL ITS EXTENSION.
MEANING, FROM THE RED MAX PLANE LINE ON THE LEFT to the BLUE MAX PLANE ON THE RIGHT.
These OPPOSED FIELD (Lenz Law), generated at the MAIN CENTER SECONDARY will ADD MAGNETIC FRICTION DIRECTLY ON THE INDUCING FIELD, (MUTUAL ATTRACTION) causing A FREQUENCY DROP on the Sequential Displacement of the INDUCING FIELD.
NO MATTER IF WE ARE TALKING HERE ABOUT A 'VIRTUAL FIELD DISPLACEMENT', STILL BOTH: THE DISPLACING AND ORIGINATING FIELDS ARE VERY REAL!!
To understand this explanation above better:

• The IINDUCED Magnetic Field generated at the Main Center Secondary whenever heavily loaded...
• IS COMPLETELY STATIC !!

Therefore, this INDUCED STATIC & OPPOSED FIELD, will try to FREEZE IN PLACE our SEQUENTIALLY AND DYNAMICALLY DISPLACING INDUCING FIELD.
This will cause an immediate Sequential Frequency DROP...BUT, ALL WE WILL NEED TO DO, is to RISE Sequential Frequency. (If we still have not a Self Feedback Connection established, from FC1 & FC2, then we will also need to RISE OUR INPUT POWER to the Sequential Coils Driver.)

CONCLUDING ON MECHANISM ONE (1) INDUCTION: This type of mechanism, because of its Geometrical positioning related to the Spacetime Diplacement of the Inducing Field, causes a very STRONG STRESS on our Sequentially Driven Inducing Magnetic Field.
Simply because it RUNS PARALLEL AND ON THE SAME SPATIAL VOLUME to the LONGITUDINAL DISPLACEMENT of our INDUCING FIELD DISPLACEMENT.
However, this Induction -so far- has proven to be the HIGHEST of the TWO in POWER OUTPUT.


The Induction Mechanism Two is NOT A CONSTANT INDUCTION like on Method One (1).
This Type 2 Mechanism acts completely in an ALTERNATED WAY, between FC1 & FC2, and I will "brake it down" on the Three Sequential Steps in just Half a Cycle or 1, 2, 3 Windows-Groups:

• On Step #1,  RED Window-Group #1, FC1 is getting a Maximum Induction Output, due to the SOUTH POLE (S) of INDUCING FIELD is at its CLOSEST DISTANCE to FC1 (RED MAX END IMPACT PLANE), As the Field is also EXPANDING its STRENGTH due to the PROXIMITY to the LEFT STEEL END PLATE.
• At Step #2, when INDUCING FIELD RETRACTS AWAY from FC1 (GREEN WINDOW-GROUP #2) FC1 Induction STARTS DECAYING.
• Then on Step #3, FC1 Induction FULLY DROPS.

Now, looking from the FC2 PERSPECTIVE, the complete OPPOSITE takes place:

• On Step #3, BLUE Window-Group #3, FC2 gets a Maximum Induction Output, due to the NORTH POLE of INDUCING FIELD is at its CLOSEST DISTANCE to FC2 (BLUE MAX END IMPACT PLANE), As the Field is also EXPANDING its STRENGTH due to the PROXIMITY to the RIGHT STEEL END PLATE.
• On Step #2, when INDUCING FIELD RETRACTS AWAY from FC2 At Step #2 (GREEN WINDOW-GROUP #2) FC2 Induction STARTS DECAYING.
• Then on Step #1, FC2 Induction FULLY DROPS.

CONCLUSION ON MECHANISM TWO (2) INDUCTION : This type of Induction Mechanism, mainly due to its ALTERNATED NATURE and COMPLETELY AWAY from Sequentially Displaced Field LINEAR TRAJECTORY does NOT STRESS AS MUCH, the Sequentially Driven Magnetic Field as Mechanism One does.
However, the Induction Output Generated on these TWO COILS (FC1 & FC2) when connected in SERIES is NOT as a HIGH OUTPUT as the one on Mechanism One (1) Type. (according to my tests done before)
As the MAGNETIC FRICTION from these Two Coils FC1 & FC2 due to its generated Induced Opposite Field, will ONLY ACTS when the MAX PROXIMITY STAGE moves to THE MID CENTER STAGE (RETRACTION) on BOTH ENDS towards MIDDLE STEP #2, Therefore, the Generated Induced Field when Loaded is NOT STATIC, but Alternatively Fluctuating between FC1 & FC2.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS: Only the FUTURE TESTS that @kampen performs on his setup, measuring Loaded Outputs, first one at a time, then the Two Outputs from BOTH Secondaries, as the EFFECT it generates at Input plus the Sequential Driven Frequency, will tell us, which of the TWO METHODS is MORE EFFICIENT as RELIABLE to be used as MAIN OUTPUT and which to use to SELF FEED or FEEDBACK our INPUT POWER.

I still believe, that the Two End Coils, due to its Alternated Nature of Induction Mechanism, as Lower Interference with Sequentially Driven Inducing Field, seems as more reliable for future arrangements than Center Main Output.
As we could always arrange the Geometry of Setup, to make these Two End Coils  to have coarser gauge as many more turns to obtain a Higher Power Output...

NOTE: Because of the length of this post, I may have to make a lot of corrections as looking for 'typos' or incorrect sentences, etc...

Regards to All

Ufopolitics

Reply to Message # 881 from Ufopolitics Subject Ref.: Two Different Types of Induction Mechanisms

Hello, my dear friend Ufopolitics,

Thank you very much for this extensive analysis and for taking the time to explain the two different induction mechanisms in such detail.

I believe your sectional-cut drawing is very helpful because it clearly illustrates the different geometric positions of the Main Center Secondary Coil and the two Feedback Coils (FC1 and FC2) relative to the moving magnetic field.
Your explanation has also clarified why You consider these to be two fundamentally different induction mechanisms:

• The Main Center Secondary Coil experiences a continuous longitudinal induction along the entire active length of the moving magnetic field. 
• Under load, this output should provide the highest magnetic interaction with the sequential excitation system.
• The Feedback Coils FC1 and FC2 receive induction only near the two end regions of the core, alternating as the magnetic field moves from one side to the other. 
• This makes their operating principle different from that of the Main Secondary Coil.

I now understand much better why you recommend testing both mechanisms independently before evaluating the complete system.
As an update on the hardware:

• I have already placed the order for the new 25 × 25 × 350 mm CRNO laminated square core.
• The Main Secondary bobbin is already in production and has been designed so that it slides directly over the new laminated core.
• The five sequential coils Q1 through Q5 will then slide over the Main Secondary bobbin.
• The feedback coils FC1 and FC2 remain mounted directly on the square core at both ends, exactly as shown in your latest sectional drawing.

While these new components are being manufactured, I will proceed with the first experimental measurements on the FC1 and FC2 feedback concept. 
This will allow us to establish a baseline before assembling and testing the complete system with the Main Center Secondary Coil.

As always, I believe the measurements will be the final judge. 
The experimental data will tell us how the two induction mechanisms compare in terms of output, loading behavior, frequency response, and their influence on the sequential drive.

Thank you again, my dear friend, for your continued support and for sharing your knowledge. 
I appreciate the time and effort you invest in helping to develop this project.

Kind regards, Alex @kampen