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

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

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

QuoteHello, 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

Hello my dear friend @kampen ,

Again and first, Thanks so much for your always constant effort by you and your colleague!!!
Your excellent work demonstrates your devotion to test and expose all these ideas!!

Your tests are very accurate, as very detailed on data!

However, I need more time to go in detail, step by step, basically on your graphics plus data then, post it all here.

There is a very simple question I have, well, maybe more than just one question, but ALL related to your driver or even on a mechanical Commutating driver.

• Have you followed my previous recomendations on "How to Start the SSD"?

I have written before that once ALL POWER is applied to your Coils on the respective PSU's, as before starting to "DIAL ANY PULSES"...

• The SSD MUST START from absolute Zero Pulse as INCREASING VERY SLOWLY. (meaning 'dialing the FREQUENCY UP SLOWLY, VERY SLOWLY.
• Second and MOST IMPORTANT...WHY are you using a STEADY 120 Hertz?
• Instead that our proposed 60 Hertz?

On ALL my previous Tests, Diagrams, Test Proposals on ALL the different Designs I have shown here...I have NEVER, even suggested a 120 Hertz Frequency?

• Is it that your driver can NOT go below 120 Hertz?
• Much less to operate at 60 Hertz?
• Or..are you just doing it, expecting these DOUBLED-HIGHER THAN RECOMMENDED frequencies (60Hz versus 120Hz) will bring better results?

Anyways, I have explained before about these PROPERTIES that Virtual Fields displacement have, and how to make it right.

• First We MUST start Frequencies from ZERO then RISING IT UP VERY SLOWLY.
• Considering -ALWAYS- that the MAXIMUM, TOP Frequency MUST BE "AROUND" 60 Hertz. (It could go "TOP" to 65 or 70 Hz MAX basically ONLY to compensate for LOADED OUTPUT...
• Then, once LEVELED UP, Frequency should be able to come down automatically, as Load Demand is fulfilled.

On my setup results for the Three Coils is to Drive mt Motor at EXACTLY 900 RPM's...Those 900 RPM's will become 60 Hertz, because I have FOUR Full Cycles per One Revolution.

CONCLUSION: Whenever we do not follow these TWO important rules (START METHOD, plus MAX 60 Hz) ...the Field CAN NOT put up (ENGAGE) with the driving higher frequencies Pulses, therefore, Output would be very poor.

On another note...I see that you have posted only Watts on Output (0.47 W) ...but what about breaking it down on V & A, at Output?
I want to know those two exact parameters (V&A) read at output, before multiplying them to obtain wattage (Power)

Now, responding to your question(s) about the role of Q3:

Q3 is just there to keep the Magnetic Field ALIVE.  Since we are COLLAPSING Q1 &Q2 on every step.

I was expecting that Q3 would NOT have any impact at Output, like your tests demonstrated...it is exactly supposed to be like that.

NOW, one missing test would be to POWER OFF Q3 COMPLETELY, while pulsing plus observing and writing down Output results (on V & A Please!!)

Another thing here...These Three Coils Setup does not need Overlapping!!

The previous overlapping was done NOT to collapse Transitioning Coils on the Eight Groups setup, or the Five Coils Setup...

But on this minimalist setup, we do not need overlapping since Q3 is ON at all the time!!

One excellent (and positively) demostrated part of your tests is that there is VERY LITTLE POWER DROP (Voltage)on PSU-1...
Except, when you mentioned that Input PSU-1 increases it input power whenever output loaded...however, that does not show on your tables, at least on Currents (Amps)

Now, is there a way NOT ALLOWING PSU-1 (in settings, I guess trying CV & CC) to rise its Input by its own?...like a DC Battery woukld behave?


Again EXCELLENT WORK on your side my dear friend and your colleague!!!

Regards

Ufopolitics

Hello again dear friend Alex,

One thing I have forgotten to answer another of your questions related to Q3 feeding -on my previous post-

Q3 is only supposed to be receiving a DC Power Input.
NEVER PULSED!

However, there is something else that I forgot to mention:

Q3 FIELD strength needs to be matched to Q1 & Q2 before pulsing them.
This is simply done by applying DC Power (not pulsed) to Q1 & Q2.

This STRENGTH process I call it BALANCING FIELDS.

This Balancing is done between:

1- Q1=Q3
2- Q2=Q3

Please, I understand that Q3 is powered separately by PSU-2, therefore, this Balancing process could be done by simply increasing Q3 power only. Of course, on the Symmetrical setup, this balancing would be much simpler than on the Asymmetrical Test,

On a separate note, Q3 having balanced strength with BOTH Q1 & Q2, will help to UNIFY FIELDS on a much stronger Attraction Bonds, as we are looking to creating a SINGLE FIELD to Right and Left of this Linear Switching.

Resuming:

FIELD 1 bond= Q1 & Q3
FIELD 2 bond= Q3 & Q2

Therefore, we will unify them as Left Field 1 (Q1 & Q3) as Right Field 2 (Q3 & Q2)

It is also understood that on transitions, these Two separate Fields will UNIFY as just one Field, comprehending ALL THREE COILS (Q1, Q2 & Q3)
However, due to parallel connections on all Transitions, would increase independently Fields fed by PSU-1 (Q1 & Q2) while Q3 will preserve its steady strength fed with DC from PSU-2.

Regards

Ufopolitics