Hello to All,

Ok, first let's start by positioning Brush at contact #1...on image above.

On this precise point in time, the red Field S, ends its full expanding cycle, as N Field starts its process on its cycle.

Meaning that on contact #1 N Field is fully retracted to its Primary Coil dimension (always have in mind that magnetic fields expands spatially, beyond Coil-Core Physical Mass)

* However, (and this is the part I am still not happy with, and I will comment below on EDIT 1) here, N Field Coil is receiving FULL CURRENT, as HIGHER INDUCTANCE, as the LOWEST INDUCTANCE RESISTANCE, simply because NO SEQUENCE Coils-Rings are ON its SIDE connections, DICTATED by the Brush positioning.






Now, on above image, Brush is at Contact #8.

On this point in time, Blue Field "N" is finishing its expansion cycle, as Red Field S, just starts its cycle.

Meaning that on contact #8 S Field is fully retracted to its Primary Coil dimension.

* However, (and this is the part I am still not happy with, and I will comment below on EDIT 1) here, S Field Coil is receiving FULL CURRENT, as HIGHER INDUCTANCE, as the LOWEST INDUCTANCE RESISTANCE, simply because NO SEQUENCE Coils-Rings are connected ON its SIDE, DICTATED by the Brush positioning.


I also set on Commutator, an Angular, green dotted line, to define the plane where Cycles Start/End for Both Fields.

As you can see, this is an 180º cycle per EACH Field displacement, through Spacetime.

Like I always say, I may be adding to this post later on...as editing and correcting info.

Regards

Ufopolitics


EDIT 1: * On Both Statements when Field is Fully Retracted and is receiving Full Currents, Full Inductance as it has Lesser Inductive Resistance...I still see here a FLAW...it should take place the COMPLETE OPPOSITE!!
Whenever Magnetic Field is Fully Expanded, is that when this expanded Field, should receive FULL CURRENTS, FULL INDUCTANCE as Less Resistance...guess (up to now) we can not "have our cake and eat it too..." old saying.
But I know, I am so sure, that whenever we can achieve that part above...we will be 100% Successful!!

Quote from: Ufopolitics on Jan 27, 2024, 01:59 PMEDIT 1: * On Both Statements when Field is Fully Retracted and is receiving Full Currents, Full Inductance as it has Lesser Inductive Resistance...I still see here a FLAW...it should take place the COMPLETE OPPOSITE!!
Whenever Magnetic Field is Fully Expanded, is that when this expanded Field, should receive FULL CURRENTS, FULL INDUCTANCE as Less Resistance...guess (up to now) we can not "have our cake and eat it too..." old saying.
But I know, I am so sure, that whenever we can achieve that part above...we will be 100% Successful!!

Now, quoting myself above...to go over this issue again.

I know one of the ways we can overcome this problem, is whenever we move into a fully functional, Solid State, Electronic Circuit, through a Microprocessor, that we can Program into, our Functions, as we want them...as to Command Processing Unit, to FORCE Higher Currents by adding or reducing external resistance, inside the Driver board, at the required specific timings.

And of course, connections would be different, as each individual Ring Coil would be connected, NOT in series (as above images), but each independently one, connected to the Electronic Driver different terminals.

But, that is in the near Future...as we still have to test this Setup, then see how it goes.

Other than that, the Magnetic Fields are displacing in Longitudinal Spacetime, as I wanted to, this time AT UNISON, plus fields are not collapsing at all...and Input Currents are minimal now...and also Inducing Energy into Secondaries as a nice and smooth AC Sinewave...

So far this are good news.

Regards to All

Ufopolitics

Hello to All,

Ok, I wanted to clarify some possible doubts, when it comes to the Drawings I have shown before, related to Magnetic Polarities Positioning, plus windings on Coils.

Even though, I have mentioned several times here, that this Method is based on a PURE ATTRACTION CHAIN, it is better to Visualize the way it goes.

So, here is an Image below, to show ALL Magnetic Polarization Distribution plus Displacement, based on METHOD 2:




On Image above, I have simplified the Connections, Commutator and Brush into a LINEAR DISPLACEMENT to "visualize it" better (even though they are still the SAME THING as previous Images)

FIRST, note the North/South Alignment...it is a Perfect, True, Attraction Chain, which means that ALL COILS, are wound on the SAME DIRECTION, and aligned in order to deliver this exact directional Polarity projection.

This means that here there are:

1- NO Bifilar winding.

2- NO CCW and CW combinations ANYWHERE.

3-This Coils are ALL WOUND, EITHER CW, or CCW...but ALL THE SAME WAY!!..And it is your choice to do it CW or CCW ALL (I am doing ALL COILS CCW)

So, Brush here MOVES BACK AND FORTH, LINEARLY, or 1 through 8 and BACK, 8 through 1...and so on, on repetitions of BACK<>FORTH.

NOW, IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY, JUST TO THE TWO INTERNAL POLES OF BOTH END PRIMARIES...YOU REALIZE THEY ARE North and South, SOUTH FOR LEFT SIDE PRIMARY ON SCREEN, [color=var(--input-txt-color)]AS, NORTH FOR RIGHT PRIMARY ON SCREEN. [/color]

AND SO, BOTH PRIMARIES, INTERNAL POLES S<>N, ARE SET FACING THE SEQUENTIAL RING COILS...

AND THERE, IN BETWEEN, AND SAME LENGTH AS RING COILS, IS WHERE WE SET OUR SECONDARY (NOTE UPPER BRACKET DEFINING SPACE AND WRITTEN: "SECONDARY")

Ok, so far up to here, You have now all clear, (and if you do not, please, then go back and re-read it all again, please do not continue below!!, if you still do not have it completely clear in a FULL understanding, because it will confuse you even more!!


Here is the FINAL IDEA, I want you to conceive, whenever looking at this METHOD 2 SETUP...


And it is simple People...all we are doing here, is MOVING the Sequential Coils that are wound inside the Rotor Drum, of an Armature, that was in between the Two Fields on a Dynamo, from the 19th Century...

So, instead of Rotating these Coils, we are "Approaching and getting them Further Away", sequentially, to one Field on the Left, and then to the other Field on the Right.

All Rotational movements of "Closer and Further apart" of coils on Armature related to stator fields, are achieved by Figuera, in a Rectilinear Movement, NON Rotational...However, it is the SAME MAGNETIC EFFECT!!

Then, since our "Armature-Rotor" does not have a "Rotor"...and it is in a LINEAR ALIGNMENT, then we can set INSIDE ALL ARMATURE RING COILS, the other Induced or Secondary.


Ok, so, here is the last image for this post...Just Two Coils in an Armature of a Dynamo, 19th Century, apart by 180 degrees...only Two Coils...for sake of simplicity.


Coils #1 and #2 are in SERIES Connected (like ALL Coils on the Armature)...but I have set two at both extremes...they Rotate CCW here, but this does not matter, it could also be CW...

The IMPORTANT POINT HERE, is that as both coils rotate, on this position, and this directional rotation, and there are:


1- Two Coils GET CLOSER to each Stator Field of Opposite Polarity.  (here S><N)

2- Both Coils get a FULL ALIGNMENT to Stator Fields of Opposite Polarity (here S><N)

3- Two Coils start getting FURTHER AWAY from the Two Stator Fields of Opposite Polarity.

Then "Next Pair of Coils on the row" do the same exact thing...and so, each pair gets 1-Closer 2-Align to then get 3-Further Away, from Stator Fields...

Resuming...All these Coils do -in general- is to Get Closer- Align to Stator Fields- Get Away...and that is in a complete LOOP...where they repeat the same FUNCTIONS [1, 2, 3] on and on...but at a very fast speed.

We were here observing in detail at "Slow Motion"...


Ok, same thing...I more likely come back to Edit this post...


Regards


Ufopolitics

Ok, now, if we review my first images before prior post, where Primary N "Fully Expands" as Primary S "retracts"...to then have the Opposite, or N contracts and S expands...

it is also a correct Perspective View. As Both Stator Fields Alignment with the Seven Centered Sequential Coils, is MAGNETICALLY DIRECTIONAL, by an Attraction Chain.

The only difference, is from what point of view, we are looking into these magnetic interactions.

1- From Both Stators of Opposite Polarity, point of view. Where Sequential Coils are just "EXTENSIONS" of the Primaries Fields.

2- Or From the Armature and its Sequential Coils point of view. Where we consider Stator Fields as "Non Changing" Components...but just staying there without any virtual movement of their magnetic fields.

For both points of views, it results in a Coherent, Orderly Displacement of the Magnetic Fields.

And here, as an example, I will "freeze" a Rotational Frame, on a typical Rotary Dynamo...exactly when Stator Fields are perfectly Aligned, linearly, with the Two Coils on the Armature-Rotor...


So, what happens here?


1-Here we interpret the "Lenz Law"...where it recites that the Induced Coil(s) [here the two coils on Armature] become of the OPPOSITE POLARITY as to the Inductor one(s) (on this case the Stator Field(s) Coils...and that is exactly what we are seen on  image...a perfect Magnetic Attraction Chain as: N/S>N/S-N/S>N/S (the two inner N/S-N/S are the Two Rotor Coils)

2- Due to Lenz Law, this is where Stator Magnetic Field(s) and Rotor Coils Magnetic Fields, BECOME ONE, THEY BOTH LOCK UP, on each side extreme of Armature. So, here is when Armature LOCKS with Stator Fields.

This is the point, that in order to move to step #3 of previous post: Coils on armature get FURTHER AWAY...is where the Prime Mover Rotating this Dynamo, needs to exert MAXIMUM FORCE, to separate this FORMED Attract Chain, mainly if Dynamo is LOADED.

Now our point of interest here...is that whenever Coils on Rotor are Closer to Stator Fields, these coils become an EXTENSION of the Stator Field, on each end.

In our Design, there is no need to exert any force, simply because, we are not Physically separating the coils and armature steel core...but we are taking that Field from closer to Stator Coil, and getting it "further away" and closer to the other side Stator, by just moving our positive feed, the Brush, in a linear fashion.

Regards


Ufopolitics

Post Data: I need to get back to winding my sequential coils...and these posts take a long time to draw graphics, process them, and compose these posts...meaning, I will be only in, to answer fast questions with short answers...nothing that needs a lot of "elaboration"...otherwise I will never finish my coils.

Thanks

Quote from: Ufopolitics on Dec 03, 2023, 01:10 PMHello All,

Ok, on ALL previous posts, I have been showing all connections* based on the Original 1908 Patent by Clemente Figuera.
However, the MAIN POINT here, is the NEW STRUCTURAL INCORPORATION of the "R Box" right in between both Primaries (N & S)...

*All connections, basically referring from the commutator jumpers across, to the way of having connected the R Box in a Single row of coils to N and S Primaries.

Meaning, that Figuera shows the R Box with ONLY Eight [8] contacts going to the 16 elements commutator, where Two(2) of those eight contacts are common, two straight contacts that also go one to each Primary N and S Positive end.

So, this Design, FORCES Us, to have ONLY ONE SET OF COILS SEQUENCES on the R Box...

As I have explained on my previous Posts, if We wire it and wound a SINGLE SET OF COILS SEQUENCES , we will generate Two Magnetic Fields, which are in ATTRACTION MODE (S/N-+-S/N) at the Positive feeding point...

This method of connections looks very neat and clean, as in "Theory", it looks as is completely perfect...All explanations from an "Electrical point of view" are understood fine, as it matches our "BASIC" knowledge about Magnetic Fields...after all, using a N-S Field Bond, is the way we always have been doing it along History...

So, this method is supposed to work beautifully, right, Uh?

WELL, NO, unfortunately, when I took this Method of Connections to the Real Build Testing, it does NOT WORK!!

For some reason, both Fields CANCEL Induction, and it does induce into Secondary, but it is nothing to consider as a "top notch" design...

However, like I mentioned before...this  is not "over yet", I never give up that easy...actually is getting better by the minute...

Good morning to All,

As you can see above, I have quoted myself on an old post #25 on page 6...that I wrote back on Dec 3, 2023.

And I had to go back in time, as I knew I have tested this option before, that I am disclosing lately, as "Method 2"...

Well, all I can tell you is that I was WRONG then, to give as a "FINAL DETERMINATION" that this Method did not work...and the reason why it did not work then (for me), is simply due that the setup I tested, was a VERY LOW RESISTANCE COILS...starting by the Two Primaries.

However, my previous study, analysis and Diagrams that I did on Page 5, from Post 20 to Post 22, related to this same Method 2 of connections are "spot on"!!...perfect!!

Those three images (that I am uploading them again, below) defines exactly, what I was referring to, on my recent Method 2 discussions:



And a much simpler way to understand what we are doing is shown on Image below...where I literally separated the two main coils to demonstrate they are just Two Coils connected in Parallel.


Now, for sake of simplicity, I only have Two Coils here, split by a "center floating-sliding Positive Tap" (that represents our positive Brush)...but, in reality, we can have MANY COILS, connected ALL in SERIES, and TAPPED at their joints which are: end of last to start of next one...and so on.

For Method 2, I have shown Seven (7) Sequential Center Coils, connected in series, as Two (2), One on each end Primary Coils, also connected in series to the Sequence Coils Group.

And that gives me, exactly, Eight[8] terminal taps...that goes to commutator contacts, numbered 1 to 8 taking 180º...then bridged/jumped, to make a "return" as from 8 to 1 on the other 180º.


Ok, so, I want that this example, serves as future builds...that we should NOT, NEVER, discard "A Method", because it simply, did not work for us, with a "specific setup" at that time...

Because, that setup could just have the wrong settings, that the Method requires to work properly.

Method 2 requires a Higher Resistance in our Coils...and no, it will not work for lower resistance coils...they will be just making a "short circuit", that would rise our Input Amps "sky-high" ...not giving us the positive results we are searching for...

Regards

Ufopolitics