ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT 004 · MOVING MEMBRANE / MHD / MAGNETIC STACKS

Can two toroidal devices help each other?

Real four-bar linkage closure drives changing membrane chamber volumes. Computed pressure, startup flow, electrical current, coil coupling and input/output energy are compared across five arrangements. The simulation runs on your device.

CHOOSE AN ARRANGEMENT · AUTOMATICALLY CALCULATED

01 / SOLID MEMBRANE + MOVING IRIS HEADSONE TORUS

Copper: membrane wall Cyan: flow channel Orange/blue: N/S magnetic orientation

t = 0.00 sAPERTURE · —PUMP STROKE · —

02 / ENERGY & PHYSICAL EVIDENCEREAL NUMERICAL RECEIPT

Gross electrical output—

External motor input—

Net electrical result—

Computed water/metal flow—

Magnetic coupling proxy—

Energy budget error—

Computing physical constraints...

ORIGINAL V10 MEMBRANE SOLID / VOID

03 / GEOMETRY SOURCE · MEMBRANE COMPRESSION / FLOW

READING ORIGINAL V10 GEOMETRY

Checking selected V10 voxel mask on the same origin.

Computing same-grid hydraulic reference...

Copper voxels are actual V10 solid material; blue voxels are voids. The displayed slices are the source's static 3D topology, not a new synthetic torus mesh. Their modeled through-flow resistance now changes the torus calculations. Iris compression is applied separately to the outer moving chamber; a combined deforming 3D membrane/CFD model is not solved yet.

Original V0–V13 → V10 membrane flow →

Flow starts from rest, then responds to the iris strokes

Solid line: module 1 flowDashed line: module 2 flowChronological fields are computed from changing chamber volume and the hydraulic/electrical equations—not decorative particles.

Same numerical assumptions · every arrangement tested

RANKED BY NET ELECTRICAL RESULT · NOT BY GROSS VOLTAGE

ARRANGEMENT	GROSS µW	MOTOR mW	NET mW	FLOW µL/s	COUPLING

The paired independent-loop cases use two separate fluid circuits; the two IN SERIES cases share one closed flow path and test opposite versus synchronized moving walls. Every case includes two powered iris drives and motor losses. Total flow between these topologies is not directly comparable.

What the model actually moves

The four-bar crank and coupler are solved from mechanical link lengths at each input angle. The follower drives a membrane aperture approximation, changing actual chamber volume. Each head has a calculated suction or discharge rate from its volume derivative. In the IN SERIES experiment, two moving volumes obey separate mass conservation equations, linked by two directed ideal check valves around one closed fluid circuit. The imported original V10 solid/void geometry (or labeled V10 fallback) now supplies a matched-grid hydraulic conductance ratio, which modifies the simulated torus resistance. The generated flow drives hydraulic inertia and magnetic braking.

Displayed membrane strokes are visually enlarged to be legible; actual radii are in the numerical receipt. A check valve is idealized, with no unresolved reverse leakage.

90°, north/south and opposite rotation

90°: The idealized coil mutual inductance approaches zero in the chosen symmetric arrangement; this can reduce coupling rather than amplify it. North facing south / inverted: Reverses electrical polarity and changes mutual interactions, but output still requires mechanical pumping energy. Counter-rotating: The second iris crank turns backwards, altering phase and pulse timing; fluid direction is separately set by the ideal check valve.

The alternating IN SERIES pair initiates forward flow from rest in the numerical circuit; synchronized strokes provide the control. The test tracks coil magnetic energy, membrane compliance and fluid kinetic energy. No free spin-up or efficiency gain is awarded.