Hello, dear Ufopolitics,

Thank you very much for message #923.

This additional explanation makes the required series connections and magnetic polarity much clearer.
I now understand your 2–2–2 proposal as follows:
For each Q group, the two identical coils are connected:
END of Coil 1 → START of Coil 2
leaving:
START of Coil 1 and END of Coil 2
as the two external terminals of that complete Q coil.

The important condition is that both individual coils must reinforce each other magnetically, giving:
[N/S] + [N/S]
rather than opposing each other.
Therefore, for a future 2–2–2 arrangement:
Q1 = two series-aiding coils
 Q3 = two series-aiding coils
 Q2 = two series-aiding coils
and all three complete Q groups must maintain the intended magnetic attraction chain along the core.

I also understand your resistance calculation. With approximately 8 Ω per individual coil, two in series would give approximately:
RQ ≈ 16 Ω
so approximately 8 V would give 0.5 A under steady resistive conditions and approximately 16 V would give 1 A.

Of course, during the switched tests we will also measure the actual coil current waveform, because the inductance and switching timing mean that the current will not necessarily reach the simple DC value during every pulse.

However, after considering your previous clarification about the Main Secondary, I think I would prefer another approach for our first corrected test.

Rather than immediately adding three more Q coils simply to fill the length of our existing Main Secondary, I would prefer to manufacture a new, shorter Main Secondary bobbin and coil, specifically matched to the present:
Q1 – Q3 – Q2
active section.

This will allow us to correct the Magnetic geometry while changing as few experimental variables as possible.
In other words, the first corrected construction will be:
FC1 – [Inner Steel Plate] – Q1 – Q3 – Q2 – [Inner Steel Plate] – FC2
on our 25 × 25 mm square laminated CRNO core, with:
Main Secondary active winding length = total active length of Q1 + Q3 + Q2 only.

I have already prepared the concept for a new shorter Main bobbin.
I will take the actual measurements directly from the Q1/Q3/Q2 assembly before finalizing it, so that its winding section corresponds as closely as practical to the complete active Q-section.

This seems to me the cleanest experiment because we already have extensive reference measurements from the present three-Q-coil system.
After correcting the FC positions and fitting the correctly sized Main, we can repeat the baseline measurements and see exactly what the geometrical correction changes.

Then, after establishing that baseline, we can still build and compare your 2–2–2 series configuration as a separate experiment.

Your clarification regarding FC1 and FC2 is also understood.
They are secondary output coils and are NEVER externally powered.
For the series connection you specify:
END FC1 → START FC2
with:
START FC1 and END FC2
becoming the two output terminals, provided their Magnetic/electrical polarity is such that their induced outputs add.
Before permanently connecting them in series, I would like us to measure FC1 and FC2 individually on the oscilloscope first.

This allows us to verify their relative polarity experimentally. We can then make the series connection and confirm that:
VFC1 + VFC2 adds rather than cancels.

I also understand your recommendation that FC1 and FC2 should eventually be short/narrow coils with low resistance, approximately 2 Ω each or less, using heavier wire, because the induction you expect there is concentrated near the end/front of the moving inducing field.

We already have different FC coils available, so this gives us another useful controlled comparison.
I would prefer to establish the corrected geometry first and then compare the FC versions under exactly the same Q1/Q3/Q2 operating conditions.
Regarding their possible future use as feedback coils, we will certainly measure the available FC output carefully.

Before attempting any feedback connection, I would first like to determine their actual delivered power into a known load and compare it with the total input power of the system.

That way, we have a clear quantitative basis for any later feedback experiment.

So, unless you see a problem with this approach, my proposed sequence is now:
First: correct the physical geometry of FC1 – Q1/Q3/Q2 – FC2.
Second: manufacture a new shortened Main Secondary matched exactly to the active Q1 + Q3 + Q2 length.
Third: repeat our baseline Q1/Q2/Q3 and loaded Main measurements.
Fourth: measure FC1 and FC2 individually, establish their polarity, and then measure them series-aiding.
Fifth: compare the existing FC coils with your recommended shorter, lower-resistance FC coils.

Finally: after we have this corrected three-Q-coil baseline, we can build and compare the 2–2–2 series configuration.
I think this approach will give us a much cleaner scientific comparison because we will know exactly which construction change is responsible for any difference we observe.

Special thanks again for explaining the coil starts, ends, and magnetic orientation so clearly.
This removes another important ambiguity before we rebuild the setup.
 
Based on your latest clarifications in messages #922 and #923, I have revised the construction drawing again.

See image below:



It now shows the corrected FC1 – Q1 – Q3 – Q2 – FC2 arrangement, the 25 × 25 mm laminated CRNO core, the new shortened Main Secondary, the S/E coil orientation, and FC1/FC2 strictly as induced output coils — NEVER powered.

I have also included your recommended series-aiding connection for FC1 and FC2, with polarity verification before connecting them.

Could you please review this drawing and confirm whether it now represents your intended magnetic structure and electrical connections correctly before we start rebuilding the setup?

If you see anything that still needs correction, please let me know and I will update it before construction.
Many thanks again for your guidance and patience!

Regards,
 Alex / Kampen

Hello dear friend @kampen,

Thanks for all the work done, it looks great now!!

All the Magnetic Structure is fine now, as all our Secondaries relationship!

Yes, -of course- you need to test each Singular FC Coil first, then add them in series and read again...

As I see what you want to do-build now, before you get involved on the 2-2-2 Q's Coils arrangement...

You want to make a New Main Secondary Coil adjusting in length to your existing Single Three Q's Coils setup LENGTH, at approx. 8.0 Ohms each...

To then compare it to your previous tests with a larger (in length) Main Secondary, having around 2.0 Ohms...correct?

Ok, now, in order to make a 'fair comparison testing', you MUST make this New Main Secondary to have the SAME EXACT gauge and resistance as your previous longer one.

Would you be able to make this newer Main Secondary Coil that way with a much restricted Length than previously one?

Using the same Three Q's Coils as before, with same Inner Diameter, as the Same Inner Steel Core?

Honestly, I do not think you would be able to achieve this goal, unless you use a finer wire gauge than previous one...and still reach the 2.0 Ohms.

In my honest opinion, your single Q Coils are 'too narrow' (in LENGTH) to extend their Field as Two Single Coils in series would do...and over a much longer Main Secondary Coil.

Anyways, it would be interesting your tests results with this new shorter Main Secondary...

But, remember this:

• If you have to change wire gauge (to a much finer gauge, of course)
• To reach same Total Resistance
• Compared to your previous Main Longer Secondary...

Then you can not compare it to your previous tests results...basically on Output results.

It would just be a "New Test" that could only be compared to a 2-2-2 Q Coils arrangement, with a much longer Main Secondary...


NOW, Since the beginnings of this project, I insisted that the ONLY WAY to start to build this Design...

• First BUILD/WIND your Main Secondary with its Spec's as wire gauge to reach a very LOW Resistance.(in my case I have 4.0 Ohms @ 16 gauge)
• Now, once -and ONLY- after this Coil is finally built/wound
• THEN you 'FIT' ALL your Sequential Coils LENGTH.
• So, you DIVIDE your Main Sec. LENGTH by whatever number of Sequential Coils would be used ON TOP.
• And so, you start winding EACH SINGLE Top Sequential Coil.

That's the way I have spent Thousands of hours... putting together posts, builds 2D & 3D CAD's...and videos...just about the way I WAS BUILDING IT...It is ALL there, on previous pages.

It CAN NOT, be done the other way around...

Meaning to build your Sequential coils FIRST...then make your Main Center Secondary...

This projest design STARTS FROM THE STEEL CORE >MAIN SECONDARY>SEQUENTIAL COILS> END, meaning from INSIDE>OUTWARDS

If we want very positive results, of course.


So, again, I see the 2-2-2 setup as a more ROBUST ONE, as easier to put together and then test it with ALL You have built so far...NO MAJOR CHANGES, NOR NEW PARTS.

It would be just adding more coils in series on the sequence...which at the same token, would give you larger Spatial Field Length, than just ONE Single Sequential Coil out of only Three total would do.

Now, you can just balance out your possibilities as your numbers, versus ALL I have written here, then see which one is better for you to put together so it can be tested...

Regards dear friend!

Ufopolitics

Hi, dear Ufopolitics,

Pleased to inform you.
I checked the new shorted bobbin dimensions and the coil calculation.
With 0.6 mm enameled copper wire, AWG23 about 265–270 turns should fit comfortably and should give roughly 2 Ω resistance at room temperature +20 C.

This is the same wire thickness used for the long Main Secondary Center Bobbin/Coil.
The required wire length now is around 33 metres.

Best regards,
Alex / kampen

Quote from: kampen on Oct 06, 2026, 06:50 AMHi, dear Ufopolitics,

Hello @kampen,

Quote from: kampen on Oct 06, 2026, 06:50 AMPleased to inform you.
I checked the new shorted bobbin dimensions and the coil calculation.
With 0.6 mm enameled copper wire, AWG23 about 265–270 turns should fit comfortably and should give roughly 2 Ω resistance at room temperature +20 C.

This is the same wire thickness used for the long Main Secondary Center Bobbin/Coil.
The required wire length now is around 33 metres.

Best regards,
Alex / kampen

So, you were using 23 gauge wire -originally- on the (longer) Main Secondary?

I thought -since the very beginning of this whole Thread/Topic- that we ALL agree to use a MUCH COARSER GAUGE on ALL Secondaries !!??

When starting by my Main Secondary Coil Building Spec's, plus the real build...I emphasized that I was using 16 Gauge at 4.0 ohms total resistance.

23 Gauge were used ONLY for ALL Sequential Coils!!

Every Single Phase Generator (the ONLY MODEL I have been studying here) in this World is built that way, where the actual Inducing Field has a Higher Resistance that ranges from 50 to 70 ohms, while using FINER GAUGE WIRE.

WHILE ALL the Generator's Fields or Secondaries were built with 14 or 16 Gauge!!

These Methods have been established for over 200 years for a simple reason...

To obtain at Output Higher Voltage BUT MAINLY,with much Higher Amperage or currents.

ANY typical Single Phase Home Generator have a Running Exciting Field at 180 Volts at 2.0 Amps.
While Generating from 120 at 15 Amps, and/or 220 Volts at 10 Amps at their multiple Outputs.

Do you think a 23 gauge wire would be able to handle that OUTPUT power?

Anyways, do whatever you feel like building...

BUT, PLEASE, do not then tell me that "it did not generate as You (Me) expected!!

BECAUSE I CLEARLY KNOW, THAT WITH THOSE MAIN SECONDARIES AND FC1 & FC2  23 WIRE GAUGE, THE MACHINE WOULD NEVER, EVER, PRODUCE WHAT WE EXPECT.

So, if You want to keep TESTING FAILURE AFTER FAILURE...then do it.

First it was ALL your Magnetic Structure totally wrong!

And now the Secondaries with FINE GAUGE?

Come on Alex!!

Are You working for the REAL OVERUNITY RESEARCH TEAM? or are you against me (THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS ENTIRE FORUM)?

IT WILL ONLY TAKE SOME PAGES BACK TO SEE CLEARLY THAT I HAVE ESTABLISHED THE SAME MAGNETIC STRUCTURES OVER AND OVER, (FOR ALL THE MANY DIFFERENT MODELS I HAVE PRESENTED HERE) WITH COLOR GRAPHICS, 2D & 3D CAD'S, BUILDING VIDEOS, DETAILED POSTS...ETC,ETC AND A LOOONG ETC!! AS ALSO ALL CALCULATIONS ABOUT THE PROPER GAUGE TO USE WHEN AND WHERE...

AS ON NOT EVEN A SINGLE MODEL, I HAVE RECOMMENDED 23 AWG FOR ANY SECONDARIES ON THE WHOLE FORUM.

Ufopolitics

Hello All,

I opened this Forum Website on November 2023...And this Topic was the MAIN REASON I decided to put it together at my own expense.
IF You ALL go and look at the date when this Topic was created...is : November 19, 2023...

Since then, I have been OPENLY DISCLOSING ALL MY METHODS, MY FAILURES AND MY WINS HERE!!

I am VERY DISAPPOINTED that I never had the BACKUP from ALL BUILDERS HERE that I was expecting to have...

MEMBERSHIP IS COMPLETELY FREE!!??

And still, very little cooperation.

As whenever that "cooperation" exists...it keeps FAILING!!

FAILING because paying absolutely ZERO ATTENTION to ALL I HAVE EXPOSED HERE!!!

Then, OF COURSE ARE GONNA BE FAILURES!!

FAILURES BECAUSE WRONG BUILDING SPEC'S, WRONG BUILDING MAGNETIC STRUCTURES...

AM TIRED OF ALL THIS BS!!

At this point I feel like LOCKING UP THIS TOPIC, HONESTLY!!

OR, GETTING WHOLE SITE ON "MAINTENANCE MODE"...NO MORE POSTS, NO MORE VIEWING!!

I HAVE TO REALLY THINK ABOUT THIS...BUT MAYBE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT "THEY WANT" RIGHT?

SO, -IN TIME- I WILL MAKE FIRST MY OWN TEST PROOF THAT THESE SYSTEMS WORKS AS I EXPECT THEM TO!!!

AND IF "YOURS" DO NOT WORK?...IT IS SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU HAVE NEVER DONE IT AS REQUIRED AND ORIENTED OPENLY HERE BY ME, MYSELF AND I!!

Regards All

Ufopolitics