Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: bajac on October 08, 2012, 12:21:28 AM

Title: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 08, 2012, 12:21:28 AM
The attached document explains how Mr. Figuera's "infinite energy machine" works.
It is amazing how we keep recycling old concepts over and over again. And then, we even claim that we are the inventors.

Bajac


I NOTICED THAT FIGURE 21 IS IN ERROR. PLEASE, REPLACE PAGE 15 WITH THE ATTACHED ONE!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 30, 2012, 04:14:26 AM
FINAL VERSION!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 02, 2012, 05:07:20 PM
 
[size=0pt]  [/size]
[size=0pt]MR. FIGUERA'S INVENTION MADE OBSOLETE ALL MOTIONLESS ELECTRIC GENERATORS (MEG) BASED ON PEMANENT MAGNETS!
 
 ISN'T IT AMAZING???
 
 PATRICK KELLY PUBLISHED THE PAPER ON MR. FIGUERA. HE DID A NICE JOB ON THE SKETCHES. I REALLY LIKED THE 3D VIEW OF MR. FIGUERA'S DEVICE ON PAGE 19.
 
 STAY TUNED! PATRICK'S WEBSITE CAN BE FOUND HERE:[/size]
[size=0pt] [/size]
[size=0pt]http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf)[/size]
[size=0pt] [/size]
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 04, 2012, 06:21:21 PM
 The commutation using transistors can be done by using a micro-controller such as Arduino. The Arduino controller can be bought from ebay by about 20 dollars.
 
I am attaching the program code that can be used to drive 8 transistors. You can copy and paste it into the Arduino’s application software. The program has been documented to be self explanatory. Each transistor is on for 2ms and 0.5ms before is turned off, the next transistor is turned on to produce a make-before-break transistor switching. Note that 8 transistor will be switched on-off at 2ms time interval for a period of 16ms to generate a frequency of 62.5Hz. The period for 60Hz voltage is 16.67ms.
 
I am also attaching a photo of the setup used to test the software. I tested the functionality of the software with a lower frequency and it seems to be working fine. The frequency can be changed by changing the values of “x” and “y.”
 
Here is the source code:
 
/*
  Written by WONJU-BAJAC
  Source code for Clemente Figuera's Generator
  Generates the driving signals for 8 switching transistors
  where 2 transistors turn on before one turns off
  (Make-Before-Break swtiching.)
 
  This example code is in the public domain.
  As per 2012-11-03 Rev2
 */
 
// Pin 13 has an LED connected on most Arduino boards.
// give it a name:
int led1 = 3;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 3
int led2 = 4;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 4
int led3 = 5;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 5
int led4 = 6;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 6
int led5 = 7;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 7
int led6 = 8;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 8
int led7 = 9;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 9
int led8 = 10; // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 10
 
// Variables Declaration:
float x = 0.5; // half millisecond overlapping time
int y = 1;     // 1 + (2 x 0.5) = 2 milliseconds’ time each transistor is on
// defines a time period of 8 x 2 = 16 ms (62.5 Hz)
 
// the setup routine runs once the program starts:
void setup()
{     
  // initialize the I/O pins 3 through 10  as outputs.
  pinMode(led1, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led2, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led3, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led4, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led5, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led6, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led7, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led8, OUTPUT);   
}
 
// the loop routine runs over and over again forever:
void loop() {
 
  // Pre: LED 2 on
  digitalWrite(led1, HIGH);   // turn the LED 1 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds 
 
  // Pre: LEDs 1 & 2 on
  digitalWrite(led2, LOW);    // turn the LED 2 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 1 on
  digitalWrite(led2, HIGH);   // turn the LED 2 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 1 & 2 on
  digitalWrite(led1, LOW);    // turn the LED 1 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 2 on 
  digitalWrite(led3, HIGH);   // turn the LED 3 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 2 & 3 on
  digitalWrite(led2, LOW);    // turn the LED 2 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 3 on
  digitalWrite(led4, HIGH);   // turn the LED 4 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 3 & 4 on
  digitalWrite(led3, LOW);    // turn the LED 3 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 4 on
  digitalWrite(led5, HIGH);   // turn the LED 5 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 4 & 5 on
  digitalWrite(led4, LOW);    // turn the LED 4 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 5 on
  digitalWrite(led6, HIGH);   // turn the LED 6 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 5 & 6 on
  digitalWrite(led5, LOW);    // turn the LED 5 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds             
 
  // Pre: LED 6 on
  digitalWrite(led7, HIGH);   // turn the LED 7 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 6 & 7 on
  digitalWrite(led6, LOW);    // turn the LED 6 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds       
 
  // Pre: LED 7 on   
  digitalWrite(led8, HIGH);   // turn the LED 8 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 7 & 8 on
  digitalWrite(led7, LOW);    // turn the LED 7 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds           
 
  // Pre: LED 8 on
  digitalWrite(led7, HIGH);   // turn the LED 7 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 7 & 8 on   
  digitalWrite(led8, LOW);    // turn the LED 8 off   
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
   // Pre: LED 7 on 
  digitalWrite(led6, HIGH);   // turn the LED 6 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 6 & 7 on
  digitalWrite(led7, LOW);    // turn the LED 7 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds   
 
  // Pre: LED 6 on
  digitalWrite(led5, HIGH);   // turn the LED 5 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 5 & 6 on
  digitalWrite(led6, LOW);    // turn the LED 6 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 5 on
  digitalWrite(led4, HIGH);   // turn the LED 4 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 4 & 5 on
  digitalWrite(led5, LOW);    // turn the LED 5 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 4 on
  digitalWrite(led3, HIGH);   // turn the LED 3 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 3 & 4 on
  digitalWrite(led4, LOW);    // turn the LED 4 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 3 on
  digitalWrite(led2, HIGH);   // turn the LED 2 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 2 & 3 on
  digitalWrite(led3, LOW);    // turn the LED 3 off 
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
  // Post: LED 2 on
 
}
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 06, 2012, 05:54:03 AM
I did some research on the subject and it looks like the stepper motor drivers are perfect for the application.

I am looking for a dual phase smooth change stepper motor drivers. These drivers can generate two sinusoidal voltages with 90 degrees out of phase. IT IS PERFECT!!!

It would be greatly appreciated if someone can share more information on this subject.

I JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A BIPOLAR (DUAL PHASE) STEPPER DRIVER. IF THIS DRIVER CAN BE FOUND, THE FIGUERA'S GENERATOR CAN BE BUILT WITH THIS DRIVER AND THE ELECTROMAGNETS ONLY. AN AMAZING SIMPLE APPARATUS!

Thanks a lot!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tagor on November 06, 2012, 07:28:46 AM

I am looking for a dual phase smooth change stepper motor drivers. These drivers can generate two sinusoidal voltages with 90 degrees out of phase. IT IS PERFECT!!!

Thanks a lot!

yes i am using afmotor libraries
 
https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit-Motor-Shield-library (https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit-Motor-Shield-library)
 
 
and this
 
http://207.58.139.247/products/81 (http://207.58.139.247/products/81)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wings on November 06, 2012, 09:54:54 AM
like this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cnc-1-7A-12-36VDC-128Micostep-Bipolar-CNC-digital-Wantai-stepper-motor-driver-/170829137223?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27c635c547
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gadgetmall on November 06, 2012, 12:49:46 PM
this one is more to my budget 3 dollars with led indicators for the the 4 outputs and a free stepper ...http://www.ebay.com/itm/DC-5V-Stepper-Step-Motor-ULN2003-Drive-Driver-Test-Module-Board-5-Wire-4-Phase-/170922204635?_trksid=p2047675.m2109&_trkparms=aid%3D555003%26algo%3DPW.CAT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D142%26meid%3D3267539110322744953%26pid%3D100010%26prg%3D1076%26rk%3D2%26sd%3D170829137223%26

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 06, 2012, 09:25:46 PM
I think I found a very good IC for driving two coils with any current trace imaginable: DRV8834 from TI

http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)

One needs a microprocessor with at least two Digital/Analogue converters (Pins) and 6 I/O Pins.

An other drawback is the package (very small, pins close together, a pain to solder by hand)

See page 20 Fig. 12 in the data sheet (High-Resolution Microstepping Using a Microcontroller to Modulate VREF Signals)

The price is very low, less than 5 Euro.

Drive capability: 11.8 Volt, 1.5 Ampere (logic and D/A 3.6 Volt), very good for the TI LaunchPad MSP430

Of course, the program will be a bit evolved (D/A in combination with 6 pins in coordination), nothing for the faint hearted microprocessor programmer.

If some one knows how to solder such a small IC by hand, any suggestions are appreciated.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rensseak on November 07, 2012, 09:20:53 AM
I think I found a very good IC for driving two coils with any current trace imaginable: DRV8834 from TI

http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)

One needs a microprocessor with at least two Digital/Analogue converters (Pins) and 6 I/O Pins.

An other drawback is the package (very small, pins close together, a pain to solder by hand)

See page 20 Fig. 12 in the data sheet (High-Resolution Microstepping Using a Microcontroller to Modulate VREF Signals)

The price is very low, less than 5 Euro.

Drive capability: 11.8 Volt, 1.5 Ampere (logic and D/A 3.6 Volt), very good for the TI LaunchPad MSP430

Of course, the program will be a bit evolved (D/A in combination with 6 pins in coordination), nothing for the faint hearted microprocessor programmer.

If some one knows how to solder such a small IC by hand, any suggestions are appreciated.

Greetings, Conrad

Wie wäre es mit Ultraschalllöten? http://www.sonicsolder.com/ (http://www.sonicsolder.com/)
Wenn Du das mit der Hand löten willst, viel Spaß dabei. Primär gehts wohl darum, dass der Chip nicht durch Hitzeeinwirkung vom Löten beschädigt wird.
Ansonsten würde ich erstmal alle Füßchen von unten mit einer möglichst dünnen Schicht Lötzinn versehen. Anschließend auf die Platine legen ausrichten fixieren und nur noch mal von oben ohne Lötzinn festlöten. Bei allen Lötprozessen für ausreichend Kühlung des Chips sorgen. Hope you are german.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Lakes on November 07, 2012, 10:21:41 AM
SMD Soldering tutorial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 07, 2012, 02:24:48 PM
SMD Soldering tutorial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE)

Thank you Lakes, you made my day, very good tutorial!

I looked a bit deeper into the stepper motor drivers:

In order to drive the two primary coils of the Fiquera Transformer one needs a very flexible stepper motor driver because the phases have to be driven differently to a stepper motor.

See the attached drawing which explains the difference between driving a Fiquera Transformer and a stepper motor.

What it comes down to: one has to be able to drive the two Phases at 180° (stepper motor needs 90°).

So far the only one which seems to be suitable is the DRV8834.

DRV8834PWP - DRIVER, MOTOR, DUAL H BRIDGE, 24HTSSOP
DRV8834PWP - TEXAS INSTRUMENTS - DRIVER, MOTOR, DUAL H BRIDGE, | Farnell United Kingdom (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)

ADAPTOR, SMD, SSOP-24, 0.65MM
RE931-04 - ROTH ELEKTRONIK - ADAPTOR, SMD, SSOP-24, 0.65MM | Farnell United Kingdom (http://uk.farnell.com/roth-elektronik/re931-04/adaptor-smd-ssop-24-0-65mm/dp/1426165?Ntt=1426165)

There might be many more stepper motor drivers which can be used, but look carefully. The two phases have to be driven at 180° for the Fiquera Transformer (and at 90° for a stepper motor). Many stepper motor drivers are fixedly set to a phase difference of 90°.

Driving capability of the DRV 8834: from  +10.8 Volt  to  -10.8 Volt , at 1.5 Ampere. This may be not high enough.

But one could use several pairs of primary coils and for each pair a DRV 8834 (all DRV 8834 ICs driven in parallel with the same pins of the microprocessor).

It may be, that I misunderstand the phase difference (in the two primary coils) necessary for the Fiquera Transformer. Whatever it is, 90° or 180°, one will want to try both (and therefore needs a driver that can do both).

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 07, 2012, 04:52:00 PM
Wie wäre es mit Ultraschalllöten? http://www.sonicsolder.com/ (http://www.sonicsolder.com/)
Wenn Du das mit der Hand löten willst, viel Spaß dabei. Primär gehts wohl darum, dass der Chip nicht durch Hitzeeinwirkung vom Löten beschädigt wird.
Ansonsten würde ich erstmal alle Füßchen von unten mit einer möglichst dünnen Schicht Lötzinn versehen. Anschließend auf die Platine legen ausrichten fixieren und nur noch mal von oben ohne Lötzinn festlöten. Bei allen Lötprozessen für ausreichend Kühlung des Chips sorgen. Hope you are german.

Danke für die Hinweise. Das Wchtigste ist wohl der SMD SSOP24 Adapter.
 http://at.farnell.com/roth-elektronik/re931-04/adapter-smd-ssop-24-0-65mm/dp/1426165

Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 07, 2012, 07:52:50 PM
I have found this dual H-Bridge driver:

L298N (http://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)
- OPERATING SUPPLY VOLTAGE UP TO 46 V
- TOTAL DC CURRENT UP TO 4 A (2A per channel but you can parallel them for higher current output)
- LOWSATURATION VOLTAGE
- OVERTEMPERATURE PROTECTION
- LOGICAL ”0” INPUT VOLTAGE UP TO 1.5 V (HIGHNOISE IMMUNITY)

It will be easy to interface it with Arduino using a protoboard. There are Arduino shields available based in that IC as well, just Google it.

90 degrees phase (or any other angle) can be realized via software, just look for DSS (digital signal synthesis) Arduino code examples.
When I get mine working I will publish the code so stay tuned ;)

BTW. The core I'm using can be found in some PC power supply.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 07, 2012, 09:49:54 PM
I have found this dual H-Bridge driver:

L298N (http://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)

It will be easy to interface it with Arduino using a protoboard. There are Arduino shields available based in that IC as well, just Google it.

90 degrees phase (or any other angle) can be realized via software, just look for DSS (digital signal synthesis) Arduino code examples.
When I get mine working I will publish the code so stay tuned


I hate to play the clever one. But I have to tell you, that the L298N is not useful. You can only supply one voltage to the coils (full step). It may be possible to implement a different phase shift than 90° (but I doubt even that).

The point is, that one can deliver at least 4 (better 8 or 16 or 32) different current strengths (voltage levels) to the two primary coils (that is the reason for the seven resistors when using a commutator). And in addition one wants to be able to vary the phase shift.

It is not so easy to do nicely what the commutator and the resistor bank is doing crudely in the original design. I spent many hours to look for the DRV8834. There are no easy short cuts if one wants to beat "commutator with resistor bank". With the L298N you will do much worse than with the commutator. You can only switch the coil on and of f. But you have to vary the current going through the coil from 0 to maximum current in several steps. I think that 4 current levels are the minimum. I would not do no less than 8 different current levels (to be better off than with the "commutator with resistor bank").

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: I do like your three part transformer. I wonder if one could just take a Ferrite rod (or even a mild steel bolt) and wind the three coils next to each other? One will use low frequency (e.g. 50 Hz to 100 Hz) any way, so no fancy material for the core is needed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 07, 2012, 09:50:17 PM
I'm pretty sure you can do that with an Arduino. The basic Arduino comes with 2 PWM outputs that can be programmed for frequency and duty cycle, IIRC. These are used by robot builders to control servomotors driving wheels, so the robot can turn or accelerate.This means that the frequency and pulse width of each output can be independently controlled, thus giving control of phase in software. I think.

Here a person uses two pots to control the frequency and duty cycle of one of the PWM outputs of an Arduino, I think. Or he might be using both outputs in just the manner you need, one for f and the other for %. The pots don't actually control the motor; the Arduino reads a voltage value from the pots, translates that into a numerical value between 0 and 255, and passes that to the PWM stage digital controller. So the desired numerical values for f and % can be sent by any means or even hard-coded into the program. The second PWM output can be controlled in the same way, and the two can be synched for phase angle in the program. I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hzv6m_8fo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hzv6m_8fo)

Arduinos are easy to program, especially if you know c or c++, and there is a _lot_ of help on the internet for Arduino and Arduino clone users. The "Fry's" electronics store chain even usually stocks an Arduino clone line of products called "Osepp"; I have several of these and they are really powerful, can do just about anything you can think of requiring analog or digital inputs controlling analog or digital outputs.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 07, 2012, 10:04:57 PM
Quote
I hate to play the clever one. But I have to tell you, that the L298N is not useful. You can only supply one voltage to the coils (full step). It may be possible to implement a different phase shift than 90° (but I doubt even that).


You do it by PWM Mr. Clever ONE :)
Read about direct digital synthesis!


Here is an example http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/ (http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: vrand on November 08, 2012, 03:23:27 AM
The attached document explains how Mr. Figuera's "infinite energy machine" works.
It is amazing how we keep recycling old concepts over and over again. And then, we even claim that we are the inventors.

Bajac


I NOTICED THAT FIGURE 21 IS IN ERROR. PLEASE, REPLACE PAGE 15 WITH THE ATTACHED ONE!



Thank you for sharing, keep up the good work!
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 08, 2012, 09:13:54 AM

You do it by PWM Mr. Clever ONE :)
Read about direct digital synthesis!

Here is an example http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/ (http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/)

The DRV8834 (and practically all stepper motor driver ICs) do chopping (at a high frequency) and one can in principle implement a chopper with a microprocessor. But you have to add two full bridges (or at least two half bridges) in an external circuit (and supporting components) in order to get some power (e.g. +-10 Volt and 1.5 Ampere) for driving the Figuera transformer.

My argument is price (less than 5.-- Euro for the DRV8834), the avoidance of a lot of soldering and reliability of operation.

But there are many ways to build a test bed for the Fiquera transformer, I just want to come up with a versatile, cost effective and usable contraption.

I am not a salesman for stepper motor driver ICs, I just happen to know what they can do.

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: Speeding up and slowing down a stepper motor means to vary the time between steps. "Micro stepping" happens in between steps and tries to smoothly push the rotor from one step to the next by varying the current through the coils at step N and through the coils at step N+1 (which happens to be similar to Fiquera's idea). So, Fiquera's idea is similar to what happens between step N and step N+1 in a stepper motor when doing "micro stepping".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 08, 2012, 09:31:11 AM
My argument is price (less than 5.-- Euro for the DRV8834), the avoidance of a lot of soldering and reliability of operation.

It's my argument too, L298N is less than 2 Euro :)
So an Arduino + L298N is very cheap. No problems in soldering, no additional components needed, only freewheeling diodes across the coils and few small caps and inductors for lowpass filtering. (see the example I provided)
By software output signal chopping (PWM) we can control 2 independent full H-bridges inside L298N having TWO sine wave signals (or any other type of signal such as saw-tooth) up to 35 kHz on its outputs.
It means variable current as well...

You can't go cheaper/simpler than that, just wait and see...

Greeting from Poland where the price matters ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gadgetmall on November 08, 2012, 01:22:38 PM
Great Project . Thanks for the Heads up on the driver research. Wish i did not waste 3 bucks but hey i'll experiment with it anyways until a circuit is nailed down for sure .... ..Gone looking for bigger c  and i cores now..

Keep us posted with any progress Please .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 08, 2012, 09:40:58 PM
I couldn't help myself... I will be testing this configuration ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 09, 2012, 02:40:41 AM
 Guys, your set-ups look impressive!
 
 I would like to point out the following;
 the voltage rating of the coils could be more than 20V. Therefore, the voltage rating of the driver should be no less than 30V. With such a low excitation voltage, the primary coils cannot be connected in series.
 
 In addition, I am not sure if the output voltage and current of the stepper motor drives is sinusoidal AC voltage. If the driver voltage is a sinusoidal DC voltage (DC offset), then we have a problem.
 
 Can someone help with this issue?
 
 Thank you,
 Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 09, 2012, 11:49:15 AM
I guess that this fresh video of a SELFRUNNER from mr. clean at energeticforum will be somewhat related to this thread! :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzE-p0GJb_Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzE-p0GJb_Q)


It's based on the BiTT of Thane C. Heins.

Those principles exist in Figuera's generator topology as well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 09, 2012, 06:28:32 PM
Figuera's generator can be considered the first Motionless Electric Generator (MEG).
 
The available information from his patents indicates that the only competition for his generator was the generators based on a rotating shaft. Figuera goes on describing the moving generator as the one that converts mechanical energy into electrical energy, while his apparatus does not utilizes mechanical energy. Figuera also stated that his apparatus is self-excited, that is, a small amount of output energy can be fed back to the N and S coils and the external battery can be disconnected.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 09, 2012, 09:13:17 PM
See the attached schematics for the test system I will build.

For an initial test I will wind all tree coils (primary 0 - secondary - primary 1) on a Ferrite rod next to each other (the secondary will be sandwiched between the two primaries).

Greetings, Conrad

http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2012/07/24/new-product-mcp4725-breakout-board-12-bit-dac-wi2c-interface/
http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/treiber-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234
http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/msp430g2452in20/mcu-16bit-8k-flash-20pdip/dp/1865383
http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/msp-exp430g2/entwicklungskit-msp430-launchpad/dp/1853793
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 09, 2012, 11:45:23 PM
There is a thing called a "motor controller shield" that snaps onto an Arduino, that incorporates 2 L293D quad half-H high current motor drivers onboard, plus breakout connectors. This shield interfaces between the Arduino proper and your motors. It will drive 2 RC servos, or 2 standard stepper motors, or 4 regular DC motors by PWM. You can run the motors off the Arduino power bus or from a separate power supply to the H-bridges. The 293s are in the standard 16-pin DIPs and are in sockets, so you don't have to mess with SMDs and hassle a lot when you blow a driver chip.

I have one that I use with the Osepp arduino clone. It works great for motor control and I suppose you can program any kind of signal to the two L293 drivers you like, maybe.

makeshields.com "full function motor control shield for arduino"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 10, 2012, 10:50:30 AM
There is a thing called a "motor controller shield" that snaps onto an Arduino, that incorporates 2 L293D quad half-H high current motor drivers onboard, plus breakout connectors. This shield interfaces between the Arduino proper and your motors. It will drive 2 RC servos, or 2 standard stepper motors, or 4 regular DC motors by PWM. You can run the motors off the Arduino power bus or from a separate power supply to the H-bridges. The 293s are in the standard 16-pin DIPs and are in sockets, so you don't have to mess with SMDs and hassle a lot when you blow a driver chip.

Unfortunately the L293D is completely useless for micro stepping, it just can switch the transistor bridges on and off (no in between steps, no chopping).

This is what it is all about:

http://www.stepperworld.com/Tutorials/pgMicrostepping.htm

And it is even more complicated in case one wants that the phase difference is not locked at 90°.

Look at the circuit I posted in my last post. This is what one needs. Of course one can do it in many ways, but the circuit shows the principle, it shows the capabilities needed. Whatever circuit one builds or finds, it should match or even outperform the capabilities of my example circuit.

The components in my circuit are all very modern and therefore consume little power by themselves, which is essential for a self runner. There are microprocessors which have on board DA - converters (one needs two), but they need considerable power (in comparison to the MSP430G2xxx series). AD - converters (for sensing applications) have become common in microprocessors, but DA - converters integrated into microprocessors are still rare.

When looking for stepper motor drivers (or boards), look for at least 8 MICRO STEPS. The emphasis is on MICRO (in between steps). For these micro steps one has to vary the CURRENT through the coils along a Sinus wave form with a 90° phase difference. And only a few stepper motor drivers allow to even change the 90° phase difference and to realise any wave form for the CURRENT. Of course, all drives which can vary the current (which can do MICRO steps), do it by chopping.

An alternative way would be to just use two full transistor bridges and to do the chopping and phase control with the micro processor. But to do the chopping in any useful and fairly clean way, a lot of additional circuitry around the full bridges is necessary which I would hate to have to design. This is the reason why I looked to the stepper motor driver ICs, where they have solved all the little problems of "chopping" in the last 10 years.

I continue the (probably unwanted) lecture, just to make everybody understand:

To beat the "Figuera commutator + 7 resistors" one needs a stepper motor driver IC or board which can do at least 8 MICRO steps (driving two coils). For higher voltages and higher currents one can find stepper motor driver ICs, which can do only one coil each, but they start to have limitations (only 4 or 2 MICRO steps).

One can of course design a new "chopper circuit" based on full transistor bridges, but I wish you good luck with that, specially if you want high voltage and high current. Why do you think are the high power stepper motor drivers which can do at least 8 MICRO steps rather expensive and rarely versatile?

I want to test the Figuera idea, but I do not want to go into "chopper circuit design". "Chopper circuit design" has been solved in connection with stepper motor drivers which can do MICRO stepping (8, 16, 32 MICRO steps or even a lot of MICRO steps along an analogue wave form like the DRV8834 can do).

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: I promise to stop my lecturing about stepper motor drivers and chopper circuits.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on November 10, 2012, 12:45:42 PM
Where is the original Figuera work? I can't seem to find that.
Perhaps another group?

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 10, 2012, 03:52:34 PM
Norman,

A sketch of the patent can be found in this Spanish article:
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005

And, this is a poor English translation of that article:
http://orbo.es/?p=26

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 10, 2012, 04:00:12 PM
Conrad,

I do not think the PWM devices work in the manner that you described. The H-Bridge transistors are switching transistors, that is, they turn on and off, only. There is not intermediate steps. The chopping wave that you see is the average value of the PWM pulses. The losses (heat up) would be too large, if the transistors had worked as linear amplifier or with intermediate steps.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 10, 2012, 08:29:41 PM
Conrad,

I do not think the PWM devices work in the manner that you described. The H-Bridge transistors are switching transistors, that is, they turn on and off, only. There is not intermediate steps. The chopping wave that you see is the average value of the PWM pulses. The losses (heat up) would be too large, if the transistors had worked as linear amplifier or with intermediate steps.

Bajac

@Bajac:

I admit doing a bad job explaining multi stepping of a stepper motor and its relationship to the Fiquera transformer.

I also admit that I do not manage to explain why one needs two DACs to drive the DRV8834 in the manner I think it should be driven.

Yes, it looks a bit strange that the two DACs give two voltage wave forms to the DRV8834 which is chopping the two full transistor bridges according to this voltage wave forms (in case you looked at my schematics). But the DRV8834 wants it like this, what can I do. The designers of the DRV8834 thought that a voltage wave form is a very good way of defining a very fine grade current change (and the current change is of course then created by the DRV8834 by chopping). And exactly this gives the very high flexibility of creating any phase shift and any "current change form" one desires.

And I never said that the full bridges in any stepper motor IC are driven in a linear or amplifying manner (all stepper motor ICs which can do MICRO stepping are chopping, switching the bridges on and off very rapidly according to a certain pulse train).

But it does not matter what I say and what I think, please read the data sheets of the stepper motor driver ICs I discussed  (DRV8834 which is very good and LMD18245 which is less suitable) and study the paper about micro stepping I cited ( http://www.stepperworld.com/Tutorials/pgMicrostepping.htm (http://www.stepperworld.com/Tutorials/pgMicrostepping.htm) ), it says it much better than me. You will see by yourself what these ICs do and what follows from that.

If you think that the DRV8834 stepper motor driver IC is not necessary, it is fine with me. I have no stake in Texas Instruments and everybody has a different idea about how to do an experiment. I am also not selling my schematics, it is given for free as an example of a very low cost implementation which according to my unimportant opinion will do a very good job when testing the Fiquera transformer. And the ICs I propose can really be bought, they are commonplace (e.g. from Farnelle and from Arduino sellers, and I am not a salesman of Farnell, I just want to hand out useful information).

From the questions which are asked (again and again) and from the stepper motor ICs and boards cited by other people I believe to see a lack of knowledge in the field of stepper motor drivers. This is the reason why I am a bit sarcastic. One should not ask me, the only way to understanding is studying stepper motor ICs and boards and specially the art of MICRO stepping (which happens from step N to step N+1, so, each hard ware defined step of a stepper motor is subdivided into many MICRO steps mainly to make it run smoother and with less torque variations). And only what is happening in between the natural hardware steps of a stepper motor (the MICRO steps) is somehow related to driving the Fiquera transformer.

So, any stepper motor driver IC or board which can just step a stepper motor is useless, the IC or board must be able to MICRO step (at least 8 MICRO steps in order to beat the "commutator + 7 resistors" of Fiquera). In addition, most stepper motor ICs and boards stick to a 90° phase shift (of the two coil groups in a two pahse stepper motor) when MICRO stepping, which according to my humble opinion is a severe drawback when testing the Fiquera transformer (but it might not bother other experimenters).

Please publish your test circuit, I probably will write my opinion about it in this forum (as I wrote my opinion about the other stepper motor ICs and boards cited by other people).

I know that trying to teach is a bad idea, people do not want to learn, they want to build want they think is best. And many think they can beat well known facts or cut corners when doing electronics.

Finally, I do not claim that I understand the Fiquera transformer and that I can make it work better than anyone else. But I think it is a fun experiment which tickles my brain and makes me do some interesting programming. The schematics I published are also a very good circuit for testing various motor ideas which I carry around in my brain for a long time and never experimented with.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 10, 2012, 11:56:05 PM
Conrad,

Please, do not take my comments personally or in a bad way. It is ok to respectfully disagree and no one should get emotional about it. We all are here to learn from each other.

It is not my intention (and I also think it is not for others in this forum) to discourage you from doing the experiment your way. As a matter of fact I think everyone here will tweak and play around with this device in different ways. THAT IS WHAT MAKES THE FORUM ENJOYABLE!

If you enjoy putting components together, soldering ICs, etc. I am perfectly fine with that. For my part, if I can take a short cut and avoid putting components together, I will. I already purchased the stepper motor driver from eBay. And, do not take me wrong, I can work at that level. I used to build electronics devices as a hobby. I also worked as an electronics technician for about 15 years. I also spent 10 years building control units with PLCs and VFDs, and writing ladder logic programs. However, for this project my main goal is not to put together a stepper motor driver, but to test Figuera's concept.

I hope everything is clear and that we can keep working together as a team.

Regards,
Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 12, 2012, 12:42:05 AM
See attached photo for my construction of the Figuera's generator. The C-electromagnets can be adjusted to change the air gap separation distance. This one shows the driving transistors, but I will replace them as soon as I receive the stepper motor driver.


Thanks.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 12, 2012, 02:04:55 AM
Nice build you got going there, Bajac!

Mine is already working, I'll post a video soon.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 12, 2012, 04:48:40 AM
Once the secondary 'Vsy' voltage is induced, the main limiting factor for the power output should be the size of the secondary wire. That is why I am using a #14AWG wire.

I am forecasting that the model of this transformer differs from the standard ones in that the primary parameters such as resistance and reactance do not affect the output power.

Wonju
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 12, 2012, 07:57:54 PM
OK, so to better understand what we are dealing with here I have drawn a quick graph.

Now which one is the best?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 12, 2012, 10:07:51 PM
KEhYo,

 The original waveform shown in the first graph is about right when you have a pure resistive load. The inductance of the primary coils should distort the shape a bit.
 
I have no comments for the second graph.
 
The third graph is not correct. You are showing two sinusoidal voltages in 90 degrees out of phase. If you applied these two signals to full wave rectifier, then, you get the correct voltage that should be applied to the primary coils. The voltage applied to the primary coils should be half-cycle sine waves. Refer to figure 21 of the document.
 
Wonju.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 12, 2012, 10:26:35 PM
The third graph is not correct. You are showing two sinusoidal voltages in 90 degrees out of phase. If you applied these two signals to full wave rectifier, then, you get the correct voltage that should be applied to the primary coils. The voltage applied to the primary coils should be half-cycle sine waves. Refer to figure 21 of the document.
Wonju.


Maybe the '0' at the beginning of the time line is misleading a bit :) It is 0 A of current flowing through a coil. the trace is a sample from a running cycle when it comes to time line.

Just look at it graphically. It has the same shape as the current traces above, all of them have high and low peaks at the same time! The last one is a current trace as well, not voltage! At the minimum peak a small amount of current still flows through a coil as per schematic!
I am proposing this type of DC-offset sinusoidal wave form as it is my belief that maybe Clemente was trying to do just that!: linear or maybe even sinusoidal current rising/falling through the coils but he only had those simple inductive resistors at hand at the time of building. We do not know the operating frequency and input coil's and resistive element's inductances to predict the waveform on the output. It might have been close to sine wave AC...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 14, 2012, 04:47:16 PM
Basically in this configuration, there are two primaries on the sides and a secondary in the middle. Primaries create magnetic flux unidirectionally and the flux from each side corresponds to the induction of current in the secondary output coil in one direction only. Splitting the cycle in two halves allows the mirror "C" core part to become alternate path for the CEMF flux from the output to take a route through that core (which is not magnetized at the moment of maximum saturation with flux from the other primary). Now, I Get IT! Think about the BiTT - The same principles apply!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: woopy on November 15, 2012, 04:35:46 PM
Hi all

a small video for the interested

This is a test of a simpler version as per the the rotative commutator, with" bizarre" and interesting  results

Hope this helps

good luck at all

Laurent

http://youtu.be/3QguCN8TP7o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 15, 2012, 08:58:25 PM
@Laurent (Woopy):

Your video is very interesting, thank you for showing your tests in such a clear and understandable way.

From the drawing of Fiquera (the one with the many coils) I got the idea, that one should try a very simple design as depicted in the attached drawing. I do not see any indication that one should use a rectangular transformer core and the secondary on a transversal in the middle.

------------------

I had some troubles with the TI LaunchPad and the 20 pin MSP430G2254 microprocessor. The LaunchPad can not program this rather new Microprocessor and an attempt to update the LaunchPad firmware resulted in the destruction of the two LauchPads I had. I need the 20 pin Microprocessor MSP430G2254 (or some other 20 pin Version) in order to have enough I/O lines to control the stepper motor driver IC. And the LaunchPad can not program the 20 pin Microprocessors MSP430G... without a firmware update, which is difficult to do and not really supported by TI. Well my loss was less than 20.-- Euro, but still, very annoying.

I am now fed up with the LaunchPad and switched to the Arduino Due, but it will take some time till I get one, at the moment only a few can be delivered (at least in Austria and Germany). It seemed appropriate to wait for the new Arduino Due since it came out just about now. I would have soon regretted having bought an older Arduino

The Arduino Due has two DACs (digital to analogue converters), which will make it simple to control all aspects of DRV8834 stepper motor driver IC (I got already 4 ICs, so that I can fry a few till I get it right).

So, it will take some time till I can start real tests. But once I am up with my rather ambitious hardware I should be able to try out any conceivable current curve on two coils (with a resolution of up to 256 steps). But only with 10 Volt (-10 V to + 10 Volt = 20 Volt peak to peak) and 1.5 Ampere.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 15, 2012, 09:23:25 PM
Again looking at the Fiquera drawing (the one with the many coils) I got the idea that one could use two identical primaries (two primaries connected and wound in the same sense) only if one sends a different current wave form through them. See the attached drawing.

It is not more difficult to create the current wave form for the identical primaries (than for the ones with opposing magnetic poles) with a stepper motor driver IC (but only if the driver IC is flexible enough).

What ever one does, I find it interesting that one can play with the magnetic poles of the primaries in combination with the current wave forms.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 16, 2012, 07:42:38 AM
Alrightythen...

I have found a simple way to do the coil driving with Arduino!

All you need is:
1. ONE 10k/100k Ohm potentiometer. Connect the middle leg to Arduino's "A0" analog input. The other two legs of the pot goes to +5V and GND on Arduino.
2. TWO Logic Level MOSFET transistors to do the switching (Logic level - like in IRL series -  means that a mosfet is in a conduction saturation state at just +5V put to its gate). Connect the Gate of one mosfet to "Pin 3" and the others' gate to "Pin 11". Sources go to the "GND" of the Arduino board.
3. Connect +(positive) from a battery to both "North" & "South" coils and their ends to both drains in the two mosfets and -(negative) to the Arduino's "GND" close to the Source legs of mosfets.
4. Connect fast shottky diodes across each coil to do the freewheeling of current.

Program description:
Arduino is generating a digital signal at 32 kHz frequency using 2 PWM outputs. The value for each "sample" is taken from the sine table. There are 256 values of resolution for the "shape" of the sine wave and 256 values of amplitude. You can change phase shift by changing "offset" variable. Potentiometer allows to set the analog frequency from 0 to 1023 Hz at 1 Hz resolution...


NOW copy the code below to Arduino IDE window and save it to the microconroller and HERE YOU GO! ;)


Quote

/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
 * modification by kEhYo77
 *
 * Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
 * http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
*/


#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM


// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {
  127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
  242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
  221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
  76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
  33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124


};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator


int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase


double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6;      // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;


// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count;              // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator;   // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m;  // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.


void setup()
{
  pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  Setup_timer2();
 
  //Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
  cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0);              //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
  sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2);              //enable Timer2 Interrupt


  dfreq=10.0;                    //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
  tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //calulate DDS new tuning word
 
  // running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
  bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);


}
void loop()
{
        apin0=analogRead(0);             //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
        if(dfreq != apin0){
          tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //Calulate DDS new tuning word
          dfreq=apin0;
        }
}


//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM,  16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
  // Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
  sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);


  // Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0);  // clear Compare Match
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
 
  // Mode 1  / Phase Correct PWM
  sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20); 
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}




//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
  phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
  current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24;     // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information                     
 
  OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
  OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 18, 2012, 10:58:35 PM
Here is a video of my setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 18, 2012, 11:25:12 PM
Wow, thanks for that Arduino program code... I'll be trying it out myself, it might solve some problems I've been having on another project.

Does our BBcode allow "code" tags?

some sample lines
entered here as program code

Hmm... not really, I guess.

I wonder if the Arduino will turn a 2n7000 mosfet on directly. If so they could be drivers for larger, regular IRF series mosfets rather than logic level ones. Or if it would makes sense to use a bipolar transistor as the driver for a regular mosfet.

Arduinos are so cool, and it's great that they are programmed in c.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 18, 2012, 11:31:05 PM
Hi TinselKoala.
The best way is to separate Arduino from possible spikes. For that I would use optical isolation chip, then a regular mosfet driver chip and then any mosfet or igbt you want.
This setup is a quickie ;)


This is a simple schematic for hooking up the coils and a video of my setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 19, 2012, 12:10:40 AM
Yes, I agree about the spikes.

But I'm getting a compile error on the file.... something wrong in my avr setup, apparently, it can't find math.h, and neither can I, so I'm reinstalling avr....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 19, 2012, 12:13:50 AM
OK, got the compile error sorted... it was a file permissions issue, scrambled in the upgrade to 11.10. All is well if I run as root, program compiles correctly.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 19, 2012, 10:40:55 AM
OK. I need some help.
I've been thinking that if we could build an unidirectional resonant LC tank on both primaries it would benefit the design.


NOW. The question is:


How to make a switching circuit, that after a one way discharge, when C reverses polarity and a flow of current falls to 0, the circuit would FLIP the capacitor's polarities,
so instead of the current to go backwards it would go the same direction once again.


ANYONE?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 19, 2012, 07:42:56 PM
I think I've got it! :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on November 19, 2012, 10:22:32 PM
@TK
Quote
I wonder if the Arduino will turn a 2n7000 mosfet on directly. If so they could be drivers for larger, regular IRF series mosfets rather than logic level ones. Or if it would makes sense to use a bipolar transistor as the driver for a regular mosfet.

Arduinos are so cool, and it's great that they are programmed in c.
   

I would agree with KEhYo that a good mosfet driver is the way to go otherwise the on/off slope is marginal at best. As well opto-isolation works as long as we understand we pay for it in efficiency and again the on/off transition suffers, so as always it is a bit of a balancing act.
I love Arduino's, remember the shit we had to go through just to make a simple multi-stage sequencer or a non-linear duty cycle, it's no freaking wonder I have lost so much hair in the last 20 years. Last week I through together a temperature compensating well pump control with the Arduino which adjusts the pump on/off time as well as the time between cycles based on OAT so I can use the shallow well's natural ground heat to keep my horses water trough full and from freezing without an expensive resistance heater. So it's 10pm/-10 Deg C, pitch black and there I am in the middle of a pasture staring at the screen of my laptop programming a well pump with two horses looking over my shoulder wondering what the hell is going on, priceless.
I think many people have under-estimated these wonderful little devices because as an engineer this is the equivalent of a swiss army knife, a super cheap super easy solution for automation and control.

Regards
AC


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 20, 2012, 12:13:14 AM
Hi AC.
The optocoupler chips consume little current and shmitt-triggered inputs of mosfet drivers don't change the output on/off transition slope in any way. There is only a delay and maybe a minute difference in pulse width. :)
I think I've got enough transistors (16!) to do the One Way resonant LC switching for both coils. This should be interesting... Some heavy 'U93' ferrites are waiting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 23, 2012, 04:00:47 AM
 Hi guys,
 
I just finished winding the secondary coil, 219 turns of #14 AWG. I wanted to share with you my observations about the calculations for this device.
 
First, because the air gap has a much higher reluctance than any ferromagnetic material, it does not matter what type of iron core you use. A low cost sweet iron core is as good as a Silicone sheet steel core. The situation is analogous of having a series connection of two resistors, 1KΩ and 1MΩ. The current would basically stay the same if a 1K, 2K or 5K resistors are used.
 
Second, when doing the calculations for the primary coil, I found that it is almost impossible to obtain 120Vac with a single core set. My calculations showed that 5.6T approximately was required. I derated the secondary voltage to 20vac and the result was 0.8T approximately. So, Mr. Figuera got it right! To have a system with rated voltage, it may be required to add multiple secondary coils.
 
Please, note that I used 1mm for the calculations. If possible, it is recommended to use even smaller gaps.
 
Thanks,
 Wonju.[/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 25, 2012, 11:45:25 PM
 I have finished building the electromagnets. The iron cores are separated with a paper thin cardboard for a minimum separation distance between the cores. The results are very encouraging. I was able to get induce voltages of 1:1 and 1:2. Of course, if primary cross talking occurs, the gap will have to be larger.
 
Notice that I built the coils with intermediate taps. The data is
 
Primary coils:
Wire gauge: #16 AWG
Taps: 215, 415, and 515 turns
 
Secondary coil:
Wire gauge: #12 AWG
Taps: 115 and 5219 turns
 
Next, I am working on the circuit use to drive the primary coils.


Bajac

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 27, 2012, 01:43:08 AM
 I HAVE MADE A REVISION TO THE DOCUMENT. I REVISED THE PATENT FIGURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMMENTS MADE IN THIS FORUM. I ALSO REVISED SOME OF THE WRITE UP AND FIGURES TO INDICATE THAT THE FLUX AND THE VOLTAGE SHOULD BE 90 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE. THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT EXPLAINED IN THE DOCUMENT IS STILL THE SAME.
 
THANKS!
BAJAC
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 27, 2012, 07:24:19 AM
@Bajac
I think that you are wrong in your assumptions of '90 degree' phase shift between Vps,Ips of North/South primaries! (As stated earlier in my posts).
In your 'revised' document on Fig.21, at the 'M' mark, magnetic fields of both primaries are equal as they should be but their magnitudes at this point should be exactly HALF of their maximum magnitudes but they are not! They are both more like 2/3 of their Bmax!

Respectfully

kEhYo
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 28, 2012, 11:42:05 PM

I got the new setup ready for testing...
I've built an Arduino based variable frequency flip-flop pulse driver that can be set manually or automatically (not yet implemented). I can generate pulses of precise length and frequency up to 30kHz.


The base is like Figuera's Generator plus additional magnetic shunt on the secondary (alternative magnetic path for the CEMF flux)...


Testing should start on the weekend, as I am a bit sick now.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on December 09, 2012, 05:10:39 AM
 Because of my workload, I do not have too much time to spend at the forum. I just wanted to give you an update of the experiments I am performing. I will continue running more tests for the following two weeks. I have not yet tested the secondary coil with a load. First, I want to maximize the design of the primary circuit.
Please, refer to the following link for the images: http://imageshack.us/g/1/9909982/ (http://imageshack.us/g/1/9909982/)
IMAGE No. 1:
Shows the setup that I am using: the Arduino controller, the breadboard with the driver, the seven resistors (200 ohms each), and the primary and secondary coils.
IMAGE No. 2:
Shows two 50Ω/50W resistors used as dummy loads to replace the primary coils.
IMAGE No. 3:
Shows the output voltages dropped across the two 50Ω/50W dummy resistors replacing the primary coils. Each scope probe is set at x10. Notice that the small voltage steps are followed by a large jump in voltage. The frequency of the voltages is about 68Hz
IMAGE No. 4:
Shows the setup of IMAGE #3 but with seven 10 ohms resistors instead of the 200Ω. The scope probes are set at x1. Notice that the voltage steps are better defined.
This is an important design criterion to be applied when using the resistors as shown in the patent. The value of the resistors must be optimized for the impedances of the primary coils. If the resistors are too high the voltage steps are small and large at positions 1 and 8 as shown in image 3. On the other hand, if the resistors are too small, the DC component of the primary current would be too high, which increases the primary current considerably.
IMAGE No. 5:
Shows the setup of IMAGE #4 but with the primary coils connected instead of the dummy resistors. No load is connected at the secondary coil. There is no DC voltage component at the coils, as expected. The controller and the driver are working fine because there are no voltage spikes. The transitions of the power transistors are make-before-break. The scope probes are set at x10.
When the loads are pure resistive as in IMAGE #4, the minimum and maximum values of the voltages occur when the transistors at positions 1 and 8 are on. When the primary coils are connected, the minimum voltage value occur at about positions 3 and 5.
IMAGE No. 6:
The top graph corresponds to the voltage drop across a primary coil with no DC component. The scope probe is set at x10. The bottom graph represents the current flowing through the same coil and corresponds to the voltage drop across the 0.25 Ohms resistor used as a shunt resistor. There is a DC component. The first x-axis from the bottom corresponds to zero voltage. The scope probe is set at x1. A design goal should be to minimize the DC component applied to the primary coils. Notice that even though the voltage applied to the coil changes in steps, the changes of the current through the coil is smooth. As expected, the current in an inductor cannot change instantaneously.
I am giving you some test bench information that can be helpful for constructing the model.
Wonju-Bajac
PS: this will be my last reference to the issue of the resistors being used as a current splitter and/or the phase shift of the primaries. I just wanted to provide an analysis of a current splitter using six (6) resistors as shown in image 7. The results of the calculations indicate that the sum of the two currents is not always a constant when using resistor loads. But, with the primary inductor coils, it could be a different story.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on December 16, 2012, 02:46:45 AM
 My experiments are moving slowly because I am building more coil sets of the transformer. I have not tested the circuit for over unity, yet. However, I did short circuit the secondary coil with a screwdriver and sparks were generated melting the wires to the screwdriver. The most interesting thing is that a change in the total primary current was not noticeable.
Refer to the following link for more images:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/9/imageno8setup.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/9/imageno8setup.jpg/)
IMAGE_No.8:
Shows the equipment setup. Heat sinks were added to the IGBTs. I also built a variable DC voltage power supply.
IMAGE_No.9:
Shows the reference x-axes channel 1 (above) and channel 2 (below).
IMAGE_No.10:
Shows the voltage of a primary coil (channel 1) and the total primary current Ipn+Ips (channel 2). NOTICE THAT THE TOTAL PRIMARY DC CURRENT IS NOT CONSTANT!
Channel 1 => 10V/Div
Channel 2 => 4A/Div
The conditions for the testing are:
Power supply Vdc = 25.30V input; Vac = 15.45Vrms; Iac≈1.30A input; primary turns = 100t; secondary turns = 219t.
Resistors:
8Ω/20W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 8Ω/20W,
IMAGE_No.11:
Shows the secondary output voltage
Channel 1 => 20V/Div
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
I will keep you posted.
[/font]
Bajac    [/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: daugustus on March 05, 2013, 09:05:47 PM
Wow, I have read some hundreds of pages of Patrick Kelly´s manual and just now have read about this generator!

Except for silverhealtheu´s proposal, which I´m not sure if has already been replicated successfully, and the Kunel patent. seems this is the simplest high power generator there...

Now, in Patrick´s book I saw the inner parts of the iron frames all rounded, which seems is something not easy to find.

Would this shape be a critical point?

Bajac,

First, congratulations on your work and, second, have you already made measurements on the output?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 16, 2013, 11:52:32 PM
Daugustus,

Thank you for your participation.

I assume that you are referring to the inner corners of the C shape iron cores. The rounding is not an issue. I am using 90 degrees corners.

Thanks again,
Bajac
Title: COMPARING HEINS AND FIGUERA'S TRANSFORMERS
Post by: bajac on April 06, 2013, 08:53:38 PM
 I have compared the designs from Clemente Figuera and Thanes Heins and concluded that the 100 years old concept is more efficient. The following are the bases for the conclusion:
 
Can you see a pattern between the apparatus of Figuera and Heins? Figuera’s design consists in placing a secondary coil between two primary coils. Meanwhile, Heins’ design shows a primary coil between two secondary coils.
 
As I already explained in my paper about the Figuera’s apparatus, the induced secondary magnetic field is pulled away from the inducing primary coil by the other primary coil. That is, there is no magnetic fields interaction between the inducing primary coil and the induced secondary coil. However, this is no true for the Heins’ apparatus.
 
First, the Heins’ apparatus found in this link:
 
http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins# (http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins)
 
indicates that the magnetic fields of the two secondary coils must interact with the primary in order for the apparatus to work. Moreover, in order for the Heins’ apparatus to have an optimum performance, the load on the secondary coils must be matched.
 
If you already read my article, you can see that the magnetic field distribution of the Heins’ design and shown in the above link is not correct. Because the magnetic field does not have a beginning or an end, it is not possible to have them flowing within the iron cores, only. Therefore, the secondary magnetic fields must cross the air gap windows of the Heins’ device to reach and interact with the only primary coil. When the loads connected to the secondary coils are the same, the net influence of the induced fields on the primary coil is zero. The effects of the secondary coils onto the primary are null and it can say that the Lenz’s law effect has been mitigated.
 
Second, if the secondary loads are not properly matched, the resultant of the secondary magnetic fields will react with the primary field in such a way as to oppose the primary magnetic field. As a consequence, the effects of the Lenz’s law are not completely cancelled and the current through the primary coil will increase. And,
 
Third, because of one secondary coil, the Figuera’s transformer should have lower output impedance than the Hein’s transformer. Having two secondary coils increases the magnetic flux losses and the wire resistance.
 
The Heins’ transformer should work better if the two secondary coils are connected in series to add their voltages. In this way you will always guarantee that the secondary magnetic fields are properly matched.
 
Finally, I have finished the construction of the primary and secondary coils. See my progress in the following photos: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/)
 
Bajac   
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 07, 2013, 02:50:51 PM
 Because of the criticality when matching the induced magnetic fields in the Heins transformer, in addition to matching the loads and the two secondary coils, the magnetic circuit must be symmetrical with respect to the center line passing through the primary coil. Any mismatch of these two halves can create serious instability issues. Said that, I expect the Heins transformer to be a little bit tricky to make it work.
 
 Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 10, 2013, 12:58:39 AM
I have simulated in Excel the output signal from the comutator as designed in 1908 (I have posted the Excel file with the simulation)

In the Excel file you can play with different values of the resistors and the inner resistance of each electromagnets, and even, you can play with one or two brushes defined as a second contact certain number of steps ahead of he first one.

Clearly Clemente Figuera was searching to create two DC signals which are unphased by 90º. The signals never reach zero voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 12, 2013, 09:48:19 PM
Hi everyone,
 
I have revised the traslation into english of the 1908 patent and I have included a new scanned drawing that I could get from the Spanish Patent Office Archive. This drawing has better quality than the one included in the previous version. Please note that in the original text there are some words which are underlined.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 14, 2013, 07:00:17 PM

Tomorrow I will show a data which confirms that the Figuera generator was running as said. I have found a newspaper article from 1902 stating the story that happened to keep in silence this device.

Be tuned ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 16, 2013, 12:20:27 AM
In the Spanish National Library it can be found some references to Clemente Figuera in newspapers from those years. This is a report which appeared just few days after filing the 1902 patent. I think this could be the reason for keeping silence from 1902 to 1908 when Mr. Figuera filed his second patent about the generator just some days before his death. Just judge by yourself this information:

24th of September of 1902, “La Region Canaria”, Page 4
 
 The Invention of Mr. Figuera

 
 When rumors about the invention of our dear friend and wise engineer Mr. Clemente Figuera appeared, we were its convinced believers, because knowing Figuera´s character he had not claim for sure an statement of such importance publicly, unless he were mad, until not being fully convinced that he had made a discovery of those which performs a great revolution in the industrial world.
 
 We had faith in him from the very beginning, and this was increasing while the famous engineer was providing us, by means of his notable work, which was published in these columns, the theories of  the invention, keeping, as it is natural, the secret thereof. It is no longer possible for even the most skeptical, doubt the invention of Mr. Figuera, because he has just sold , we assume that for high sum of money, the Spanish patent which were obtained from our government when he arrived at Madrid. The company, which has bought it, will be well ascertained, before handing the stipulated capital between that company and the inventor, that the discovery does not leave any room for the slightest doubt. Here Mr. Figuera´s telegram which has produced so much satisfaction:
 
 Madrid 15-13 h.
 
 “I have just signed sale deed Spanish patent managing world bankers first union formation. Congratulations.” FIGUERA.


Many celebrate that a discovery of this nature have been done in the Canary Islands which should worry to large companies worldwide and even to governments themselves; We are very satisfied with the patriotism of Mr. Figuera for having obtained the patent for his invention in Spain, perhaps sacrificing his interests, because everyone knows how great discoveries are paid in other nations.

 Mr. Figuera receive our warmest congratulations that we extend to the distinguished family of the wise inventor. 
(Note: in other newspaper report is written that the sum of money for the patent was 30 million pesetas (around 230,000 USD as those of year 1902)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 18, 2013, 01:16:22 PM
Seven of this electromagnet sets should work fine!
 
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/)
 
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lightend on April 18, 2013, 06:59:10 PM
the two guys who were building them, whats the results?
Im not convinced so am interested in your observations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 21, 2013, 11:05:35 PM
@Lightend


No testing yet. I just finished putting together the seven sets of coils. See my progress of the INFINITE ENERGY TOWER here:


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/197/figueratower66.JPG/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/197/figueratower66.JPG/)


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 23, 2013, 04:42:15 PM
Hi all,
 
Here I attach a pdf file with Figuera´s patent from 1902 about the electrical generator “Generador Figuera-Blasberg”. This patent was filed by Figuera some days before the telegram where he stated that the patent was sold to a banker union with a sale deed. After filing this patent and signing the patent sale there was a big silence until 1908 when Mr. Figuera filed his final patent with a detailed description of his invention on the 31th of October of 1908. In November of 1908 Clemente Figuera died. I don´t know the cause of the death neither the exact date, just that it occurred in November for some mentions in the newspapers. I think for myself that maybe Figuera was very ill and he decided to file his last patent as a legacy before dying.  Clemente Figuera was born in 1845.
 
As you can see in the patent drawing there is no reference to the reddish ink mentioned in the text. Therefore, in the 1902 patent it was not included the position of the induced coil. This patent was not granted because it seems that, after filing it and after the patent sale deed, no one paid the annuity renewal, which confirms the intention of hiding the patent, as occurred in fact.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on April 23, 2013, 05:18:27 PM
@bajac

Its taking shape now :) Nice setup, I like it.
But what about those thick reinforcing aluminium? bars on the sides of cores?
Eddy currents inside those will be huge!
Unless they are there as phase shifters...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 23, 2013, 06:22:25 PM
Keyho,
 
The permeability of aluminum is about the same as air. Because the aluminum is not in the path of the magnetic field, I see not reason for the magnetic field to leave the main core (high permeability) and travel through the aluminum (very low permeability). It could be very small interaction at the air gaps where fringing effects should occur. But, this is an issue that I will pay attention during experimentation.
 
Hanon,
 
Thank you for the superb work that you have done related to Mr. Figuera. It really gives a historical credibility to his work.
 
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on April 23, 2013, 06:36:39 PM
@bajac
You do not seem to understand how magnetic field operate.
It is about Electric vector A potential, a stress gradient. Aligned atoms inside the core make a strong density potential whereas free air outside is of lower flux density.
anything in the path between those two areas will be influenced by this gradient with the inverse square law when it comes to distance away from the core.
You will heat those bars due to eddy currents, even if you would isolate them from the cores with a dielectric (to exclude heat transfer from the cores). 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 23, 2013, 06:47:33 PM
Kehyo,
 
As I said, I will experiment and test the concept. If heating occur due to Eddy currents in the aluminum bars, then, I will replace them with something non-metallic. Thanks for the advice.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on April 23, 2013, 07:16:51 PM
Can't wait for the test results, your setup looks promising.
You're welcome ;)

Title: Re: COMPARING HEINS AND FIGUERA'S TRANSFORMERS
Post by: Farmhand on April 24, 2013, 01:09:55 AM
I have compared the designs from Clemente Figuera and Thanes Heins and concluded that the 100 years old concept is more efficient. The following are the bases for the conclusion:
 
Can you see a pattern between the apparatus of Figuera and Heins? Figuera’s design consists in placing a secondary coil between two primary coils. Meanwhile, Heins’ design shows a primary coil between two secondary coils.
 
As I already explained in my paper about the Figuera’s apparatus, the induced secondary magnetic field is pulled away from the inducing primary coil by the other primary coil. That is, there is no magnetic fields interaction between the inducing primary coil and the induced secondary coil. However, this is no true for the Heins’ apparatus.
 
First, the Heins’ apparatus found in this link:
 
http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins# (http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins)
 
indicates that the magnetic fields of the two secondary coils must interact with the primary in order for the apparatus to work. Moreover, in order for the Heins’ apparatus to have an optimum performance, the load on the secondary coils must be matched.
 
If you already read my article, you can see that the magnetic field distribution of the Heins’ design and shown in the above link is not correct. Because the magnetic field does not have a beginning or an end, it is not possible to have them flowing within the iron cores, only. Therefore, the secondary magnetic fields must cross the air gap windows of the Heins’ device to reach and interact with the only primary coil. When the loads connected to the secondary coils are the same, the net influence of the induced fields on the primary coil is zero. The effects of the secondary coils onto the primary are null and it can say that the Lenz’s law effect has been mitigated.
 
Second, if the secondary loads are not properly matched, the resultant of the secondary magnetic fields will react with the primary field in such a way as to oppose the primary magnetic field. As a consequence, the effects of the Lenz’s law are not completely cancelled and the current through the primary coil will increase. And,
 
Third, because of one secondary coil, the Figuera’s transformer should have lower output impedance than the Hein’s transformer. Having two secondary coils increases the magnetic flux losses and the wire resistance.
 
The Heins’ transformer should work better if the two secondary coils are connected in series to add their voltages. In this way you will always guarantee that the secondary magnetic fields are properly matched.
 
Finally, I have finished the construction of the primary and secondary coils. See my progress in the following photos: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/)
 
Bajac   

Hi Bajac
I assume you are referring to the BiTT setup of Thanes ?

I've done some reading of the Figuera documents but I don't see where free energy or negating Lenz law is mentioned. And anyway I don't think that two secondaries in Thane's setup
if they are evenly matched would negate Lenz effect in total or there would be no output.  No matter if the secondary does not appear to react on the primary because any output got from the secondaries enters the system by way of the primary.

Do you dispute that any energy utilized from the secondaries enters the system by way of the primary. Have you seen anything measured in the Watts range not mW range that
would indicate more energy out than is input by way of the primary ?

If a primary induces a magnetic polarity in a core and an output is got from a secondary then Lenz Law was in action or the energy transfer was not by induction.

Anyway I'm wondering where Clemente Figuera mentions free energy or the negating of Lenz Law.

Could someone point out where he mentions free energy or the negating of Lenz Law please or whatever it is that "implies" that ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 24, 2013, 01:29:41 AM
I have finished all the mechanical work related to the electromagnets. I mounted the electromagnets on a 2 ft x 4 ft base with extra space available for mounting the driver components. I have posted three photos:


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/805/cimg4013.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/805/cimg4013.jpg/)



What is left is the wiring and the electronic driver for generating the two input voltages.


I am planning on experimenting with two types of drivers, the series resistors as shown in the patent and a stepper motor driver.


We are getting close to the truth!


Bajac







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 24, 2013, 02:38:56 AM
Farmhand,

Yes, I was referring to the BiTT unit.

Figuera does not explain how the extra energy is generated or where it comes from. However, his patent does state that the apparatus is for generating electricity without fuel and it also states that the amount of power is sufficient for industrial applications. In one instance, he stated his desire to power the big steam ships with his generator. Hanon has posted a lot of newspaper citations and articles of the time referring to Figuera. Hanon has done an important work rescuing the historical data and putting the pieces together.

Neither Figuera states that the over unity is due to the manipulation of the Lenz’s law effects. That explanation is given in the paper that I posted in the forum. The answer to some of your questions is found in the published paper. I would encourage you to read it and let me know if you have any comments or concerns.

The effects of the Lenz’s law are always present when inducing currents in coils through magnetic fields! The Lenz’s law effect is the mechanism used in physics to prevent having a device with outputs larger than the inputs. In other words, the Lenz’s effect is what prevents the standards transformers and rotating generators from becoming perpetual machines. What Mr. Figuera and others have proven is that there is a way for mitigating the effect and convert these machines in truly fuel-less generators.

Still, the latter does not answer the question where the energy is coming from or what energy is being transformed. The answer to these questions will also require an overhaul of the existing theory and rewriting existing physics and engineering books.

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 24, 2013, 12:06:46 PM
TEST OF PRACTICAL IMPLEMETATION OF THE PATENT
 
According to the spanish patent Law from the begining of the 20th century it was required a certification declaring the practical implementation of the patent in order to grant the patent.
 
After the death of Mr. Figuera in 1908, his representative Constantino de Buforn (who signed the 1908 patent as his representative, what also suggest me that Clemente Figuera was ill and could not travel to file his patent), Constatino de Buforn filed some patents which are identical to the one from 1908 except for slight modifications  (obviously the patent office in that time was not doing a deep exam for novelty because those patents after 1908 are literal copies of Mr. Figuera´s patent). On one of those patents (filed in 1910 with No. 47706) there is a declaration of the test of practical implementation done in 1913 and certified by a engineer. I could revise those expedients in the patent office. The patent was granted and its annuity renewal was paid for some years.
 
With all these data I wonder: 
 
Why did Buforn file more patents about this same subject?
Why did Buforn asked for a test of practical implementation?
Why did Buforn keep on following with this idea from the filing in 1910 to the final report in 1913?
Why do the report of the test of practical implementation show a positive declaration?
Why did he paid the annuity renewal for some years?
Why did Figuera sell his 1902 patent to a banker union and he kept silence until he filed the 1908 patent some days before his death?
 
I am afraid that the answer is clear: Because the generator worked !!
 
Please find attached a file with the traslation of the implementation report and also the pictures I could take in the Patent Office.
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 24, 2013, 09:12:22 PM
hanon, my friend

You are doing marwellous work ! Thank You from all my heart , and I think Mr Figuera is happy now. Keep going, I have a feeling that things are quite opposite to all we have been told....yes,it seems scary but there is big hope at the end....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 04:33:13 AM
Farmhand,

Yes, I was referring to the BiTT unit.

Figuera does not explain how the extra energy is generated or where it comes from. However, his patent does state that the apparatus is for generating electricity without fuel and it also states that the amount of power is sufficient for industrial applications. In one instance, he stated his desire to power the big steam ships with his generator. Hanon has posted a lot of newspaper citations and articles of the time referring to Figuera. Hanon has done an important work rescuing the historical data and putting the pieces together.

Neither Figuera states that the over unity is due to the manipulation of the Lenz’s law effects. That explanation is given in the paper that I posted in the forum. The answer to some of your questions is found in the published paper. I would encourage you to read it and let me know if you have any comments or concerns.

The effects of the Lenz’s law are always present when inducing currents in coils through magnetic fields! The Lenz’s law effect is the mechanism used in physics to prevent having a device with outputs larger than the inputs. In other words, the Lenz’s effect is what prevents the standards transformers and rotating generators from becoming perpetual machines. What Mr. Figuera and others have proven is that there is a way for mitigating the effect and convert these machines in truly fuel-less generators.

Still, the latter does not answer the question where the energy is coming from or what energy is being transformed. The answer to these questions will also require an overhaul of the existing theory and rewriting existing physics and engineering books.

Thanks,
Bajac

I might be missing something and I will investigate further, but from what I have read Figuera simply designed a way of producing AC sine wave power from a battery without the need for a rotating generator and associated rotating generator Lenz effects. Basically what I read up on was a step excitation method kind of thing for generating sine wave AC, the energy comes from the battery I think. Energy cannot be generated, sine waves can be generated, AC power can be generated, sound waves can be generated
but not energy. Electricity is generated with the input of energy to do it. Energy is utilized by way of the electric power generated by the expenditure of energy on the input end.

Looked like it was all powered by a battery to me.

I'm not trying to put anyone off the experiments, just trying to understand where the implication of extra energy is from.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 05:05:17 AM
From the patent here- http://www.scribd.com/doc/114818563/Clemente-Figuera-Patent-30378-1902-Spanish-and-English-1


Here he explains a conventional rotating generator.

Quote
Since 1833, when Pixii, in France built the first magneto-electric machine, to the present time, all machines magneto and dynamo-electric science inventors has led the industry reposan the foundation in the law of induction says: "all magnet that moves toward or away from a closed circuit produces in him flows induction "In Gramme ring and the current dynamos, current occurs by induction that is exerted on the armature circuit wire, cutting their reels lines force created by the electromagnets exciters, or to move said armature, quickly, within the atmosphere between the magnetic pole faces of the electromagnets exciters and the soft iron core of the armature. To produce this movement, mechanical force need be employed in large quantity, it is necessary to overcome the magnetic attraction between the drivers and the core electrostatic attraction that opposes the motion, so the current dynamos are true machines transforming mechanical work into electricity.


Here he explains the benefit of his device.

Quote
In the arrangement of excitatory and magnets our generator armature circuit has some analogy with the dynamos, but they are completely different from that, not requiring the use of motive power is not processing apparatus.

I think there is a misunderstanding of the text or translation mistake. When he says
Quote
not requiring the use of motive power
it means he does not need to turn a generator shaft,
that does not say the device does not require electro-motive force emf to power the device.


The exciting currents become the output.
 
Quote
A excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating, Actuates all the electromagnets, que are attached or in series, or in xxxxx?, or as required, and in the induced circuit currents Comprising Will Arise, together, the full generator current. That Allows suppressing the mechanical force, since there is nothing Which needs to be moved.

The claim indicates to me he invented a type of inverter.

Quote
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing moves, Which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or Which Creates an alternating current induction in the motionless inducedcircuit, Placed Within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 09:25:32 AM
I watched a couple of Woopy's video's and All I see is a constant current transformer. If you try to draw too much power the voltage will drop and so the power will also drop. Just because the input is not affected by the output means very little.
That can be done in other ways as well. When the output exceeds the input something different will be happening.

If a device uses 10 watts right of the bat as soon as it is fired up, before any output is taken, then 5 watts is drawn with no affect on the input the device is only 50% efficient.
If the device uses 10 watts with no load then 5 watts is drawn and the input drops to 7.5 Watts then that is only 66% efficient.

If a device is using 10 watts then when 10 Watts is drawn if the input drops to zero so that there is 10 watts output with zero input, I'll eat my hat.

Testing with LED's is not much use that's flea power.

Has anyone got an output to exceed the input yet ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 25, 2013, 11:57:44 AM

The claim indicates to me he invented a type of inverter.


Farmhand,
 
If you read the patent from 1908 you will notice that Figuera clearly states that he is claiming  a generator which does not use any fuel once started.
 
“…the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”

“From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 25, 2013, 03:53:47 PM
ha ha ha Farmhand, try to explain last hanon citation  :P
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 25, 2013, 05:29:02 PM
I understand Farmhand,

If you came to me 10 years ago with the same story, I would probably have cursed you. And, I would have done the same thing; “REPEATING WHATEVER IS WRITTEN IN TODAY’S LITERATURES”.

This is what I call “STILL CONNECTED TO THE MATRIX”. We are just brainwashed with tainted information that has lasted too long!

The explanation of where the energy comes from based on today’s accepted science is the only reason why scientists and engineers don’t even try to replicate these devices. It is up to the amateurs and technicians to turn this world around and play the role of NEO.

And, I wanted to add that the patent translation made by Hanon and others is correct. My first language is Spanish and I can assure you that there is nothing hidden in the translation. It is what Mr. Figuera intended to convey.

On the other hand, I think we should get back on track and continue with the practical implementation of the Figuera’s concept. The main purpose of this thread is to replicate the Figuera’s device.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 25, 2013, 08:45:27 PM
 ;D ;D ;D ;D   everything is free energy, that's the whole truth, think about it in mantra
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 25, 2013, 10:28:53 PM
Reference in the New York Herald the 9th of June 1902:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg)

"...the only extraordinary point about it is that has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact"....."the whole apparatus being so simple that a child could work it."

As Groucho Marx said after a similar statement: "Bring me here a child of 6 years!"   ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 26, 2013, 06:33:32 PM
Reference in the New York Herald the 9th of June 1902:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg)

"...the only extraordinary point about it is that has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact"....."the whole apparatus being so simple that a child could work it."

As Groucho Marx said after a similar statement: "Bring me here a child of 6 years!"   ;)

The interesting fact here is how it's described as atmospheric electricity and how Tesla reacted on this article.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 27, 2013, 07:31:13 AM

Farmhand,
 
If you read the patent from 1908 you will notice that Figuera clearly states that he is claiming  a generator which does not use any fuel once started.
 
“…the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”

“From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”

Electricity from a battery is not fuel !

Anyway I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from doing anything, I have my doubt's myself.

Is the patent an actual granted patent ? Or an application ?

I don't recall seeing this text below in the patent I'll have to read it again.

Quote
the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”

From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”

Do you have a link to where the text above is from ?

Not here- http://www.scribd.com/doc/114818563/Clemente-Figuera-Patent-30378-1902-Spanish-and-English-1

I see what looks like a patent "application" to me here http://www.energeticforum.com/214451-post116.html

But like you say the purpose is to replicate and see for yourselves. Which is a good idea.

Now I see where the implication of free energy is from, so I can understand.

Does he give indication where the extra energy is coming from.

By the way I'm not in any Matrix.  ;D


Cheers

P.S. What I don't understand is that if the device was demonstrated and a actual patent granted, then how was it suppressed at the time when the drawings were in good condition and he was alive ?

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 28, 2013, 02:14:27 AM
Farmhand,

From your comments I am afraid that you have not followed the complete story of the Figuera´s gnerator. If you want to expend some time you could read in the forums, because I think you have not read them yet. After that, you could start doing some questions because you simple doubts are out of context at this stage.

By the way, from your ideas I could think that you are a person outside of the free energy researchers but I can see right now that you (or a person with the nickname farmhand) have 3,059 posts into the energeticforum.com  forum and you have posted some months ago in that forum about the Figuera Generator so you definitely are not unaware of this device. Sorry but I can not understand by you are asking such simple questions if you know this generator for months.

It would be wellcome if you join us in trying to replicate it, but first you have to teach yourself by reading the previous posts

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 28, 2013, 02:43:15 AM
Farmhand,

From your comments I am afraid that you have not followed the complete story of the Figuera´s gnerator. If you want to expend some time you could read in the forums, because I think you have not read them yet. After that, you could start doing some questions because you simple doubts are out of context at this stage.

By the way, from your ideas I could think that you are a person outside of the free energy researchers but I can see right now that you (or a person with the nickname farmhand) have 3,059 posts into the energeticforum.com  forum and you have posted some months ago in that forum about the Figuera Generator so you definitely are not unaware of this device. Sorry but I can not understand by you are asking such simple questions if you know this generator for months.

It would be wellcome if you join us in trying to replicate it, but first you have to teach yourself by reading the previous posts

Regards

Yes I am farmhand, those are my posts, what does that have to do with anything ?  I don't change my name and I only use one name everywhere, I get suspicious when people try to imply I am doing something wrong because I have a lot of posts, why get personal ? On the flip side a lot of posts shows I don't change names or post under different names, like a lot of people do do. I'm not accusing anyone of anything, or implying wrongdoing. Are you accusing me of wrongdoing ? If I get busy with a project here I might end up with 3000 posts here too so what of it.

I was just trying to understand where the implication of free energy came from. When things don't seem to make sense I question them.

In my last post I stated found where the claims of self running were made, and so now I have no more questions about that. Question answered. Thanks.
I do find it strange that there were no claims of free energy in the first 1902 patent or patent application or whatever it is.
And the patents don't look like actual granted patents to me.

Good luck and best wishes. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 28, 2013, 03:40:11 AM
Hi again,

Actually, the patent from 1908 was granted, if I am not wrong. Anyway the granting is not a measure of the validity of a device, it is a measure of the novelty and the inventive level of the patent.

I hope you could join us in this project. Everyone with experience is welcome. You can go throug the full story following chronologically the forums

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 28, 2013, 08:33:21 PM
Farmhand, you are like a super-fish stating that water cannot exists.... ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 29, 2013, 02:27:13 PM
It looks promissing I dont see what all the argueing is for. Tesla stated he had done something like this as well and blew it off as not new.Good for him. Guess that reveals intent and following tesla.s bread crumbs will require deeper scruteny when cross refferencing concepts. Pat 16709 http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/patents/b--16709.006/index.htm (http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/patents/b--16709.006/index.htm) could be operated backwards with a comutator to chop dc into ac. At least the horse shoe type set up. There are other patents in the list but i dont feel like looking them all up. Someone used partial quotes of the notes section from Clemente's patent excludding enough of it to make it look like something it is not. Reminds me of the way the bible is twisted by those who teach or preach. When you fill a cap to max potential I guess you have to keep filling it like a conductor feeding a motor less it magically empty out as quick as it was charged? I thought electric magnetic feilds store energy and release it back in a back spike. It looks like the back spike is going back into the beginning of the resister in the drawing no? Back spike is higher voltage shorter duration so I believe. The higher voltage back spike would out weigh the voltage of the battery or at least match it preventing the battery from expending more power to feed the feilds. As it maybe arguable that back emf does not exist for some,but for those who it dose exist if it be enough greater then the potential of the battery it could possibly be used to power a motor to operate the comutator. Where does it come from all this power? Is that as important as where is not going once started? I am not certain if a modern resister will work the same way a coil resister will work somehow I dont think so for this application. Which makes me think diodes will not work on this as well except maybe at the output but that would not not have any practical use unless you making Teslas ac to dc converter.
 Good luck and good job so far.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 30, 2013, 12:28:49 AM
Don´t you think that the text "To the origin" ('Al origen') and the sign "-" are redundant in the patent figure?
 
 I am not really sure why Mr. Figuera used the text "To the origin" and, at the same time, he used a sign "-". In the rotary comutator he used a sign "+" to mean the positive side of the generator. Therefore the sign "-" is meaning the return to the battery. Is "the origin" a external connection?.  Is it a grounding point? Is "the origin" refering to another source of energy?. Remember that Figuera stated that his generator was capturing electricity FROM the air. It seems that "the origin" may be the air. ¿?
 
I have a newspaper report ,that I hope to traslate soon, where Figuera told that he was capturing the electricity form the vibrations of the ether.

 For me it is very surprising why Mr. Figuera needed to add this text ("To the origin") if a simple sign "-" was more than enough. Perhaps he was refering to another thing.

Any idea?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 30, 2013, 03:34:45 PM
hanon

I believe this statement explains all : to the origin means special winding of coils as you can partially see on schematic....actually it is Figuera secret imho End of coils set is connected to the origin whatever it means, it is the tip for us that here lies the secret...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on April 30, 2013, 08:12:03 PM
hanon

I believe this statement explains all : to the origin means special winding of coils as you can partially see on schematic....actually it is Figuera secret imho End of coils set is connected to the origin whatever it means, it is the tip for us that here lies the secret...




Yes I agree, 'origen' can also mean 'fuente' which is 'source'... but again not telling us what or where the 'source' is?


edit: If it is electricity from the air... then could it be a connection to an antenna? (or to ground?)


Ron
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on May 06, 2013, 10:27:17 PM
Seven of this electromagnet sets should work fine!
 
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/)
 
Bajac

@bajac
Your setup was pretty much I'm ""ancioso"" to know the tests.
I want to build a setup too but I'll wait your tests with the coil cascaded to decide how to build my system.

anything new?
cheers!!!
Schiko
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 09, 2013, 02:28:04 AM
Schiko,
I have tested the coils with AC voltage only. I made this test to check the inductance of the primary coils. The results of the tests were kind of disappointed. When I applied less than 10volts AC, the primary current was approximately 4A. This is a clear indication that the self induced voltage of the primary coils is too low with 100 turns. The air gap really decreases the flux and the self-inductance of the primary coils. The air gap shall be as small as possible. If you look at the photos you will notice that the air gap of my coils is really small. I would say it is about 0.5 mm. To compensate, I am planning to add about 200 turns to each primary coil.
But, before I add the turns, I want to run the experiment with lower voltage levels. I have finished the construction of an adjustable linear DC power supply. See photos of the unit here:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/imageno14linearpowersup.jpg/
I am also writing an Arduino program to generate PWM pulses to drive an H-bridge. I think this is the most cost-effective solution for this apparatus.
On the other hand, I have been tied up with other personal business that limits the amount of time that I can spend on this project.
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on May 11, 2013, 02:16:40 AM
Hi all,
I've read this whole thread and find it very interesting. I found out about Clemente from a free eBook. I decided to try the digital timing circuit. I went to Radio Shack to see how much it would cost ($205.56). The tech there told me I would be better getting the parts myself, and he gave me the web address of the company he gets his parts from which is mouser.com . I ordered the parts from them at a cost of $48.42. Big savings!!! It only took 5 days to recieve my order.
They do have the Arduino, but I do not know anything about them.
I hope this site can help others.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 11, 2013, 09:48:36 AM
I'm short on money so I bought my Arduino clone for 10$  ::) but once I learned how to make it I prefer to build it myself according to needs (it's just a microprocessor with a voltage stabiliser)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on May 12, 2013, 06:35:27 AM
I'm short on money so I bought my Arduino clone for 10$  ::) but once I learned how to make it I prefer to build it myself according to needs (it's just a microprocessor with a voltage stabiliser)

no amount of money in the world will give you infinite energy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 12, 2013, 10:03:47 PM
what ? I'm just trying to help  :o if you have so little money to spend you can find arduino clone very cheap but I don't advice it in other case...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 15, 2013, 11:48:19 PM
Hi all,
I've read this whole thread and find it very interesting. I found out about Clemente from a free eBook. I decided to try the digital timing circuit.

Hi RMatt,

The circuit described by Patrick Kelly in his ebook is fine to do the work and easy to be built ( http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ )but it has some mistakes in the connections. Please see the scheme I have attached to this post for a correct configuration. I have just built the counters. I am waiting for the darlinton transistors to complete the circuit.

Good luck!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on May 16, 2013, 01:57:52 AM
Thank you for the circuit.
Patrick Kelly has shut down his site http://www.free-energy-info.com but was still allowing people to download ebook.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 02, 2013, 02:26:49 AM
Hi all,

Here I attach an interview to Clemente Figuera with some interesting insights. At the end of this post I have included a pdf file with the original press clipping an its translation into english.

INTERVIEW TO CLEMENTE
FIGUERA 1902 (ENGLISH)
Mr. Clemente Figuera. - The name of the
conscientious and intelligent engineer,
Inspector of mountains in Canary, is now
universally known, thanks to the news
published by the press about the generator
of his invention for producing far-reaching
consequences, because it constitutes a
valuable element in modern mechanics,
solving problems which will influence
powerfully in most industries.
The meritable engineer states in a recently
published work. - "With persistent effort
nature keeps its secrets, but man´s
intelligence, the most precious gift due to
the divine artist, author of all creation,
allows that slowly and at the cost of
thousands studies and works, the human
race realize that God's work is more perfect
and harmonious than it looks at first sight.
There was no need to create a agent for
each kind of phenomenon, nor varying
forces to produce the multiple motions, nor
so many substances as varieties of bodies
are present to our senses; In doing so, it
was proceeding worthy of a least wise and
powerful creator that that, with a single
matter and a single impulse given to an
atom, started in vibration all cosmic matter,
according to a law from which the others
are natural and logical consequences”
And later he adds: "The twentieth century
has given us the mercy of discovering its
program in general lines. It will stop using
the hackneyed system of transformations,
and it will take the agents where the nature
has them stored. To produce heat, light or
electricity, it will rely on the suitable
vibratory motion because nature´s
available storages are renewed constantly
and have no end ever. For the next
generation, the steam engines will be an
antique, and the blackness of coal, will be
replaced by the pulchritude of electricity, in
factories and workshops, in ocean liners, in
railways and in our homes”
So says Mr. Figueras, who is consistent
with his scientific creed, has based his
significant invention on harnessing the
vibrations of the ether, building a device,
that he names as Generator Figueras, with
the power required to run a motor, as well
as powering itself, developing a force of
twenty horse power. Should be noted that
the produced energy can be applied to all
kinds of industries and its cost is zero,
because nothing is spent to obtain it. All
parts have been built separately in various
workshops under the management of the
inventor, who has shown the generator
running in his home in the city of Las
Palmas.
The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus.
With the generator it may be obtained the
voltage and amperage required, as direct
or alternate currents, producing light,
driving force, heat and all the effects of the
electricity. It is said that shortly Mr. Figuera
will depart to Paris, to constitute a union in
charge of the exploitation of his invention.
Due to the gallantry of our good friend, the
distinguished photographer of Las Palmas
Mr. Luis Ojeda, we thank for making public
to our readers a portrait of Mr. Clemente
Figueras, to whom we congratulate on his
invention, making fervent hopes to produce
the expected beneficial results, for the
benefit of mankind, for the sake of science
and honor of our country, proud to count
him among the number of its illustrious
sons.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 02, 2013, 05:59:43 PM
When ever in the past I have asked how an alternator can use potential from a battery to form a field to power the loads and charge the battery which really does seem impossible.I am always told the engine provides motive power to turn the field to induce upon or in the stator the current and voltage to power the loads and charge the battery. Induction on the stator formed by building up and reversing magnetic field direction repeatedly quickly. The speed and strength of the feild regulated to offset each other should one be less then enough to get results. I always wondered why the snake cant eat it's tail other then the pain. I never really went as far as to examine the field strength required to get the effects in a counter form without motive power added to create the strength of field. Or how one would double the field strength in the stator with out needing twice the current which would consume more then the required output to do all that work. So looking for the differences between my imaginationary model and the topic of the thread I see a clever use of colliding two of the same direction poles. Thinking about examples of this effect,collision of two objects.How would that help when the two objects consume (x?) amount of energy to get moving so they can collide.At best resulting in no gain and more likely loss will never be avioded. Well eventually I considered a train motor car pushing two box cars side by side down two tracks side by side.One motor car two box cars. To a portion of tracks that ends in a closed loop. How much energy is there in the collision of two objects that are propelled by a single force and then seperated in direction so they can be smashed agaisnt one another? If the total amount of energy could be taken from the point of impact between the two cars would that equal the amount the of energy used to get the two cars moving? Like wise if two seamingly week electro magnets are put up agaist one another n to n or s to s  is the resulting crash 1+1 or something other then?What trickery can be applied to suck out every stitch of power from the point of impact instead of trying to leach off the effects of the moving cars as they pass by from the sides?Tansformers seem to be working off the sides of the fields only. While this thing is using the sides to set up fields (Motion) on the pole faces and smashing them together and pulling off at the point of impact. Is the strength of the feild magnified in the space between pole faces and what likely winding shape would it take to pick off the effect and transform it to current? The shape of field as it grows and compresses against the same would be usefull to determine the type of winding and if it should encompass the individual n or s feilds or all of them together?Or both? Just wondering.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 02, 2013, 07:41:29 PM
When ever in the past I have asked how an alternator can use potential from a battery to form a field to power the loads and charge the battery which really does seem impossible.I am always told the engine provides motive power to turn the field to induce upon or in the stator the current and voltage to power the loads and charge the battery. Induction on the stator formed by building up and reversing magnetic field direction repeatedly quickly. The speed and strength of the feild regulated to offset each other should one be less then enough to get results. I always wondered why the snake cant eat it's tail other then the pain. I never really went as far as to examine the field strength required to get the effects in a counter form without motive power added to create the strength of field. Or how one would double the field strength in the stator with out needing twice the current which would consume more then the required output to do all that work. So looking for the differences between my imaginationary model and the topic of the thread I see a clever use of colliding two of the same direction poles. Thinking about examples of this effect,collision of two objects.How would that help when the two objects consume (x?) amount of energy to get moving so they can collide.At best resulting in no gain and more likely loss will never be avioded. Well eventually I considered a train motor car pushing two box cars side by side down two tracks side by side.One motor car two box cars. To a portion of tracks that ends in a closed loop. How much energy is there in the collision of two objects that are propelled by a single force and then seperated in direction so they can be smashed agaisnt one another? If the total amount of energy could be taken from the point of impact between the two cars would that equal the amount the of energy used to get the two cars moving? Like wise if two seamingly week electro magnets are put up agaist one another n to n or s to s  is the resulting crash 1+1 or something other then?What trickery can be applied to suck out every stitch of power from the point of impact instead of trying to leach off the effects of the moving cars as they pass by from the sides?Tansformers seem to be working off the sides of the fields only. While this thing is using the sides to set up fields (Motion) on the pole faces and smashing them together and pulling off at the point of impact. Is the strength of the feild magnified in the space between pole faces and what likely winding shape would it take to pick off the effect and transform it to current? The shape of field as it grows and compresses against the same would be usefull to determine the type of winding and if it should encompass the individual n or s feilds or all of them together?Or both? Just wondering.




Woooo ,sorry...I have inability to learn long english sentences....but I will try to help you.....ready ? steady ? GO!
watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swNkzM-GYQ0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swNkzM-GYQ0)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 03, 2013, 05:29:56 PM
Hi all,
 
I have been helping to the person who did the first report about the life and inventions of Clemente Figuera in order to include more documentation into his site as well as translating it into English to make easier its understanding by most readers. We have included new material, some of them not yet released until now. The attached files to the new site are:
-        The pdf files of the 5 Figuera patents 
-        Test of practical implementation of a patent filed in 1910 by Buforn, a financial partner of Figuera, who kept on trying to commercialize his generator after Figuera´s death
-        A press report about Figuera
-        An interview to Figuera
-        Figuera´s telegram about the sale of the 1902 patent to a banker union
-        List of Buforn´s patents after Figuera´s death (you can see that they are mostly a copy of the Figuera design from 1908)
-        Some press clippings about Figuera´s invention
 
Spanish webpage: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005)             (link (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005))
English webpage:  http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)    (link (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258))
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 07, 2013, 12:18:33 PM
"The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus."

Egg of Columbus:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 07, 2013, 02:12:21 PM
"The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus."

Egg of Columbus:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus)


Yes, the simplicity overlooked by others. The scientific fact nobody care about ! The simple reality we ALL KNOW...Guess what ..???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 08, 2013, 03:46:54 PM
Tesla presented his Egg of Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla%27s_Egg_of_Columbus) the previous decade at the Chicago World's Fair in 1893.  Coincidence?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla%27s_Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla%27s_Egg_of_Columbus)

"Tesla's device used a toroidal iron core stator on which four coils were wound. The device was powered by a two-phase alternating current source (such as a variable speed alternator) to create the rotating magnetic field."

See the drawing into Figuera´s patent 30378:  http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf)

I copy one suggestion which was given to me:  "Therefore, what he does is a "Static Simulation" of the same exact changes the conductor faces, by applying a pulsating or sine wave current to the exciting coils...  ....creating a "Virtual Rotary Pulse"...we could easily apply it here if we independently feed one channel per independent exciter coils"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 09, 2013, 01:30:57 AM
Look what I have found about a replication of this generator :

http://maestroviejo.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/clemente-figuera-aunque-para-recoger-electricidad-no-haga-falta-bobina-tesla/ (http://maestroviejo.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/clemente-figuera-aunque-para-recoger-electricidad-no-haga-falta-bobina-tesla/)

The controller is a VFD (Variable Frequency Drive) from a DC motor  (PWM --> pulsed current)

Please share your thoughts about this info
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 10, 2013, 03:13:13 PM
Hanon
 Where did you get the image on Reply #97 ? Where you were asking about (To the origin). Maybe you could upload a collection of images and state where they each came from. I only speak English so looking at you last entry I was only able to veiw a couple photos. As far as thoughts go ,it apears or looks like the inductor/s are placed between the faces of the electro magnets not wrapped around a core piece of iron.Not like a transformer which shares a core with other secondary windings. I think most people can gather that from the patent discription. If all the lines of force will travel the air gap then another set of dynamic princeables have to be used like fluid dynamics to tweek the gap and its relationship to the inductive winding sitting between it. A iron core peice between the gap is most likely not needed ,the opposite electro magnets core will attract the lines of force through the space and inductor coil. If the inductor coil current ends up in the opposite electromagnets after passing through a load it will either be additive to the attraction of the lines of force.Or it will resist the lines of force by pushing back with the same force depending on how the n/s electromagnets are wound.Viewing the electromagnet charactoristics the B-H curve would benifit most if it were short and fat. To much waste goes into reaching the peaks of permiabillity when all the desired reaction is in the changing lines of force and cutting them with as much conductor as possible. Sory for the long sentences.I write as I would speak.Ive never had to use periods when speaking.Everyone I know complains about my grammer and spelling.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 10, 2013, 04:30:55 PM
Hi Doug,
 
The main site to download all info about Clemente Figuera (his 5 patents and all historical documents) is: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
 
Particularly, the picture you refer with the text "To the origin" is the figure from the 1908 patent. This is the direct link to the pdf file: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf)
 
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on June 10, 2013, 05:04:49 PM
so looking at you last entry I was only able to veiw a couple photos. As far as thoughts go ,it apears or looks like the inductor/s are placed between the faces of the electro magnets not wrapped around a core piece of iron

Hi Doug
in the text behind the photos it says one electromagnet is placed between the 2 collectors. And 4 electromagnets with 8 collectors is all that is needed.

Its an inverse way to the original patent, I think.
cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 15, 2013, 01:50:50 PM
Thanks Alvero and Hanon
 Been a long week.
 Have you considered how fast the little comutator gizmo will have to spin to output AC at 50 to 60 htz? It does all seem to be sort of backwards or inverse.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 17, 2013, 04:24:55 PM
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually meen south and north pole faces. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces.The need for seperate core peices is so the field caused by the pulse "on" travels through the other two coils opposite (y+n)or (s+n)so the direction of induction on the center coil and the off coil are the same. Current is added back in series with the on impulse acting upon the off coil through the power source. So if the on impulse was 12 volts + the feild would project through the two other core peices and coils.The reaction on the center coil would act like half a sign wave be it up or down. The outer coil which is off would induce in reverse direction of it's on state at a lower voltage or amperage but would add to the source voltage in series.A clever way to use as much of the feild as possible drawing in and using the lesser force on the far side of the induced coil used to power the load. Im not sure if enough current could be produced to remove the starting power source or not. The only way that could work is if there is unequal abillity of inducing a magnetic feild in a core piece when comparing voltage to ampere. Meaning if I use 1 volt and 100 amp on a core will it be the same measure of gauss feild as compared to 1 amp and 100 volts using identical cores and windings. So that the load could be used in part as a source once it is started even if that ment it has to be stepped up or down to add to the impulse field the strongest magnetic feild that it can produce without taking away from the productitvity of operating the load.Boy that was a bitch to explain that thought.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 17, 2013, 08:09:44 PM
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually meen south and north pole. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces

Doug, you could be right. I had already noted that in the whole text of the patent there is no reference where it is explicitly stated that "N" means north and "S" south. In fact it is just written: " Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and S. Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small). "

It is also curious the way of naming the induced circuit:  "y"  , and the clarification has always intrigued me:  "y" (small)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 18, 2013, 07:00:54 PM
Doug,
Could you post a simple diagram of what you mean? I have read this twice and I'm still not sure.
Thanks Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 18, 2013, 11:57:20 PM
I have been thinking that a possible configuration for Mr. Figuera 1902 motionless generator http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) is based on exciting the coils with a two-phase AC current in order to create a rotating magnetic field in the generator (as Tesla´s egg of Columbus). In this case the 1902 generator would be also composed by two unphased signals delayed 90º as Mr. Figuera did it in his 1908 generator.

I would like you guys have a look to D'Angelo patent www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf (http://www.overunity.com/www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf). In figure 15 (XV in romans numbers) it is represented a generator very similar to Figuera´s 1902 generator. D'Angelo excited his generator with the unphased signals represented in figures 5b and 5c  (V-b  and V-c in romans)

More info about D'Angelo: http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm)

Please comment your opinion about this patent. Do you see any paralellism between Figuera´s patent and D'Angelo´s patent?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 22, 2013, 01:06:13 PM
I dont know if I will get time to make a drawing or not over the week end. Work consumed all my time over the last week. Now i have a pile of work to look forward to at home.Im exhausted just thinking about it. Had a look at DeAngelo's patent read most of it in the dark at 3:30 am just to be able to read it without interuption. Those compound windings are madning to follow.He must of learned how to make his own contact segments from scratch so he could layer them anyway he wanted. I would like stay away from moving parts and brushes but i do see the simlarity in the theory of operation.Clever use of graduated combinations on the stator poles which could be a useful idea. You were very fortunate to stumble on that patent thank you posting it. Everyone is wakeing up and so my free time is gone like a fart in a typhoon. Being on the computor is a an attractant for the people around you to start asking why the sky is blue and why water is wet or did you see the latest video of another stupid pet and or child.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 22, 2013, 06:50:26 PM
Hi all,
I wanted to share my views for Figuera's 1902 patent. During my commuting time to work, I wrote the following about the 1902 patent. Please, forgive me for the poor quality of the hand drafted sketches but I do not have the time to make it better. All the sketches and figures can be found in the following webpage: [size=78%]http://imageshack.us/v_images.php (http://imageshack.us/v_images.php)[/size]
I uploaded image files because I was not able to upload the PDF version of the document. I had to convert it from PDF to JPEG. The following is the write up of the document:


Lenz’s law is a universal law of nature and there is no escape from it. Because of the standardization in the construction of today’s electric machines, the effect of this law is to transmit any disturbances generated by a connected load back to the source. Lenz’s law is the main justification for stating that electrical machines cannot operate with efficiencies greater than 100%. The standardization in the construction of electric machines (transformers, generators, and motors)  is enforced by organizations such as ANSI/IEEE, NEMA, IEC, etc.
However, it is a fact that electric machines can be built with higher output power than the input. The starting character of the over unity transformers or Motionless Electrical Generators (MEG) is the Spanish engineer Don Clemente Figuera. The work of Mr. Figuera is completely different than the work performed by Nikolas Tesla. Clemente Figuera experimented with coils having low frequencies and low voltages. The low frequency application allowed Mr. Figuera to use iron cores for his devices. On the other hand, Nikolas Tesla experimented with coils having high frequencies and high voltages. Because of the high frequency application, Tesla’s coils used non-magnetic cores.
Figuera and Tesla have two different technologies for the manifestation of over unity. Figuera teaches the techniques for minimizing the effects of the Lenz’s law to a point where passive electric machines become electric generators. Tesla, on the other hand, squeezed energy out of copper wires in such a high quantities that it can be compared to a cold fusion reaction. For example, Tesla estimated the power of his wireless transmitter to be approximately 100,000,000 volts at 1,000 Amps. THAT IS A LOT OF POWER!!!
Turning our attention back to the Figuera’s patents, it can be seen an incremental improvement. For instance, the Spanish patent #30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf) from 1902 discloses a generator with fixed rotor and stator and a moving induced winding moving through the air gaps. Spanish patent #30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) from 1902 discloses a true MEG. Clemente discovered that electrical power can be generated without moving parts and with efficiencies greater than 100%. The 1902 patents were sold to a consortium of banks. And finally, the Spanish patent #44267 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf) from 1908 shows an ingenious method for minimizing the effects of the Lenz’s law.
I disagree with the concept that the 1902 device requires two shifted phases or a rotating magnetic field. The 1902 patents should only require a single phase input AC voltage while the 1908 patent requires two DC voltage pulses shifted 90 electrical degrees.
For a magnetic filed to induce a voltage in a coil, the net magnetic field cutting the turns of the coils shall be nonzero. For example, FIG. 1 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/wdio.jpg/) shows five magnetic force lines pointing in a direction leaving (exiting) the winding. The net magnetic field cutting the winding turn is equal to five magnetic lines of force. Because the net magnetic field cutting the winding is nonzero, there is a nonzero net voltage induced in the winding. Assume that the voltage polarity is positive when the direction of the magnetic field points outward. FIG. 2 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/wdio.jpg/) shows five magnetic force lines pointing in a direction entering the winding. The net magnetic field cutting the winding turn is equal to five magnetic force lines. Because the net magnetic field cutting the winding is nonzero, there is a nonzero net negative voltage induced in the winding. If the numbers of magnetic lines entering and leaving the winding are equal, then the net induced voltage is zero. This condition is shown in FIG. 3 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/wdio.jpg/).
As described in my previous paper where I explained the concept of operation for Figuera’s 1908 patent, the polarity of the induced voltage is such that it will generate a current in which the associated magnetic field will always oppose the magnetic field that induced the voltage in the first place. The latter condition is also known as Lenz’s law.
FIG. 4 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/mgcj.jpg/) is my version of the configurations of the Exterior and Interior windings (a, b) of the 1902 patent. It is important to note that the 1902 patents do not meet today’s patent application requirement for disclosing the idea with enough details as to allow the device replication by a person with skill in the art. The patents of 1902 are not easily replicated because of the absence of important details. Great amount of detective work is required in order to replicate the device. Therefore, the device in FIG. 4 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/mgcj.jpg/) illustrates details of the interconnection of the windings not disclose in the 1902 patents.
The next task is the most important, to determine the layout configuration of the induced winding. The lack of details for the location of the turns of the induced winding is a major flaw in the 1902 patents. Nevertheless, an analysis - similar to the one used for describing the operation of the device shown in the 1908 patent – can be performed to figure out the riddle with relative ease.
Let us try first the induced winding configuration with the coil plane parallel to the plane of the page. FIG. 5 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/507/qmdt.jpg/) shows such a configuration. If we assume the relative polarity of the Exterior and Interior windings (a, b) is as shown in FIG. 5 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/507/qmdt.jpg/), then it represents the condition when the magnetic polarity of the Interior windings (b) are not equal forcing the magnetic field B to enter and exit the Induced winding turns (c) similar to the condition described above for FIG. 3. Because the magnetic field entering the Induced windings (c) also leaves, the net induced voltage is zero. The null voltage condition is true for any polarity combination except when all Interior windings (b) have the same relative magnetic polarity.
FIG. 6 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/fqme.jpg/) illustrates the condition in which the relative magnetic polarity of the Interior (or Exterior) windings is the same.  FIG. 6 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/fqme.jpg/) shows the condition already described above for FIG. 1, and therefore, there should be a net induced voltage in the Induced winding (c). However, because the magnetic lines must be closed paths, the magnetic field escapes in a direction perpendicular to the plane of the page resulting in an increased reluctance due to larger air gaps along the magnetic path formed outside of the device’s dimensions. This can be considered an inefficient magnetic design.
FIG. 7 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/203/9b8f.jpg/) illustrates what can be a possible working configuration of the Induced windings (c) as originally intended by Clemente Figuera. The Exterior and Interior windings (a, b) must be connected to provide a relative magnetic polarity as shown in FIG. 7 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/203/9b8f.jpg/). As you can see form the figure, the Induced winding (c) is cut by a magnetic field only exiting the Induced winding, and as previously explained in FIG. 1, there will be a net voltage induced in the c-winding – Induced winding. If a load is connected to the c-winding, a load current would be established generating an induced magnetic field around the c-winding. BECAUSE THE INTERIOR WINDINGS (b) ARE TOTALLY ENCLOSED BY THE INDUCED WIDING (c) THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD WILL ENTER AND LEAVE THE TURNS OF THE INTERIOR WINDING (b) INDUCING A ZERO NET VOLTAGE, WHICH RESULTS IN A CANCELLATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THE LENZ’S LAW. IN OTHER WORDS, THE LOAD CURRENT FLOWING IN THE c-WINDING IS NOT REFLECTED BACK TO THE b-WINDING. It should also be remembered that the Lenz’s law always occurs, that is, the induced magnetic field has a polarity that opposes the polarity of the inducing magnetic field originating at the Interior winding (b). However, the symmetry of the quadratic configuration of the Interior windings (b) and the Induced winding (c) causes a balancing effect on the induced magnetic field that enters and leaves the turns of the Interior winding (b). The direction of the induced magnetic field generated by the c-winding shown in section I-I (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/203/9b8f.jpg/) is perpendicular to the plane of the page, that is, it flows toward or away from the viewer.
FIG. 8 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/20/oae7.jpg/) shows an additional set of c-windings along the horizontal axis for increased power. Note that the magnetic field lines, shown with green lines, enter in the horizontal c-winding and leave the vertical c-winding.
FIG. 9 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/tyxl.jpg/) shows another possible embodiment of the 1902 device. If symmetry is maintained, the balance of the magnetic paths should produce the magnetic flow drawn with continuous green lines. On the contrary, if the magnetic paths become unbalanced, the magnetic flow can also branch out as shown in dashed green lines.
Can you see any similarities between Figuera's work and Thanes'? Does Figuera's device make obvious Thanes' device?
Thanks to all!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 22, 2013, 07:07:59 PM
Suggestion : please zip your pdf and upload here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 23, 2013, 02:07:21 AM
Forest,


I already reached the limit of my upload quota.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on June 23, 2013, 04:01:19 AM
Thanks Alvero and Hanon
 Been a long week.
 Have you considered how fast the little comutator gizmo will have to spin to output AC at 50 to 60 htz? It does all seem to be sort of backwards or inverse.

If one revolution of the commutator produces one electrical cycle then 60 revolutions per second will produce 60 Hz and 3600 RPM will produce 60 Hz.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on June 23, 2013, 05:36:27 AM
I'm genuinely interested to see what experiments can reveal about this setup. Even though I'm skeptical I'm also hopeful.

From my researches into two phase/split phase induction motors, ( I have a Split Phase induction motor, which is basically a Two phase motor on a three wire plan that runs from a single phase power). The way it does that is simple, there is a capacitor in series with one of the two windings which shifts the phase in the winding with the capacitor in it's circuit by about 90 degrees. And that produces a rotating magnetic field just like in a three phase induction motor. The capacitor and the second winding can be de-energized after the motor is started and it works like a single phase motor, but it has more power when both windings are used all the time. And the power factor is better.

Like all induction motors, at idle with no shaft output taken the input is still significant, they get closer to 100 % efficient as the load gets nearer to the rated load for the motor.

Most have good full load efficiency but none are over 100%.

Lenz's law in my opinion is directly related and (in proportion) to the energy transferred from the supply to the load/rotor. With some motors they have low idle power and that increases a lot when loaded and other motors can be made to maintain a constant (high) input and an output that won't change the input but is limited to the amount of the input less losses. Some motors are made so that as the speed drops so does the input, so the input drops under load (some pulse motors).

Anyway, I'm all for experimenting and checking things out, and I certainly wouldn't ignore some free energy. If it happens I'll be very interested to find out how so I can try to do it in different ways.

I'm surprised there isn't at least some replications on the you tube.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 23, 2013, 06:04:37 AM
Farmhand,


Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred. The law refers only to the polarity of the coil voltages when induced by magnetic fields.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 23, 2013, 10:22:56 AM
I think (and I tried to told all of you about it) Lenz law is just Newton III law applied to EM fields. Just spot the negative factor -  both have: equal and opposite reaction. Both are the governons which eliminate the immediate explosive accumulation of force, so it's very rare in nature. I have no solid proof about this yet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 23, 2013, 10:24:12 AM
bajac : can you just post the pdf with pictures somewhere to let us download it ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 23, 2013, 05:41:58 PM
Forest,


Can you recommend a way or website?


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 23, 2013, 06:01:47 PM
Bajac,
I spent about 6 weeks full time building and testing both the 1908 and the 1902 stationary generators. We are missing some very important point. In one of the patents Clemente mentions the Rumpkorf coil which is an open path magnetic circuit driven by an interrupter. The large Rumpkorf coils used disk shaped secondaries. Also in the rotating generators there is mention that there is no reaction from moving copper only through a magnetic field without a core. This is of course wrong. Just drop a magnet down a copper pipe. In Mexico right after Clemente died, Benitez files for British patents on similar ideas. I have no doubt that these inventions work, just not as drawn in the patents.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 23, 2013, 11:11:12 PM
Bajac pointed to the one most important aspect : all the interactions has to be assymetrical or lenz free : or in other words-  the currents in induced coils when loaded would not affect inducer coils. This is the essence for all if not every ou devices I saw (patents, not in reality ;-) )
I fully agree with all Bajac statements, however I'm not so good in all theory like Bajac.




@Bajac: maybe www.box.com ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 23, 2013, 11:50:49 PM
Forest, I too believe the theories that Bajac explains, however when I build them with iron and copper they don't work.   :(
Garry


P.S.    I don't think Bajac is having such good luck either. :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2013, 12:58:52 AM

I was very happy with the testing of my first 1908 device. I was able to verify that the effects of the Lenz's law can be mitigated. However, because I only had one set of coils (instead of seven) I did not try for overunity.


I want to say that I still have not tested the tower that I built because my workload has been unbelievable! But, I expect to run a set of tests, soon.
 

I am sorry to hear that some of you had no luck with the construction of the device. This is the place to help each other replicating Mr. Figuera's apparatus.


@iflewmyown: can you publish some pictures of your set up? Make sure the pictures provide good details of the construction. You can use the Micro mode function of the camera for better closeup photos. If we work together, I am sure we will see good results.


Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 24, 2013, 02:10:42 AM

Bajac,  My camera is sorry but here is one photo. I am glad your 1908 setup showed negation of lenz's law. I am not working at this time so I will continue with more tests tomorrow.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2013, 02:05:39 PM
@iflewmyown,
 
After reviewing your setup, I see the following issues with your setup; first, the center iron core should no have voids. It should be a solid uniform piece. Second, you need to make the gaps uniforms. The interior and exterior iron core pieces should be firmly attached. Third, I am not sure about using welding. You may be better off attaching the different parts with screws. Fourth, use rectangular interior iron cores. A round shape makes it more difficult to wind the Induced coil.
You can use laminated sheets to build the iron cores. For example, I have Silicone Steel sheets from an old 45KVA transformer. I can cut enough pieces with scissors to form the exterior and interior cores.
My recommendation to you is to start all over again. I keep saying not to cut corners when replicating the device. If you can afford it, make the drawings with dimensions and bring it to a machine shop for a good finished product.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 24, 2013, 02:23:45 PM
Hi all,
 
As bajac has his upload capacity full I have attached here his document about the interpretation of Figuera´s 1902 patent  (No. 30378 - Generator Figuera-Blasberg )
 
The attached file belongs to bajac. I am just uploading it.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 24, 2013, 02:38:54 PM
@iflewmyown,
 
After reviewing your setup, I see the following issues with your setup; first, the center iron core should no have voids. It should be a solid uniform piece. Second, you need to make the gaps uniforms. The interior and exterior iron core pieces should be firmly attached. Third, I am not sure about using welding. You may be better off attaching the different parts with screws. Fourth, use rectangular interior iron cores. A round shape makes it more difficult to wind the Induced coil.
You can use laminated sheets to build the iron cores. For example, I have Silicone Steel sheets from an old 45KVA transformer. I can cut enough pieces with scissors to form the exterior and interior cores.
My recommendation to you is to start all over again. I keep saying not to cut corners when replicating the device. If you can afford it, make the drawings with dimensions and bring it to a machine shop for a good finished product.
 
Bajac


Bajac, thanks for your comments. The center core has more iron mass than the coil cores and should not be an impediment to the flux.
If you look at the second picture you see that the gaps are adjustable with the spacers behind the exterior magnets so that after any induced winding is placed in the gap the gap may be closed tight.
The octagon has machined ends and was shrink welded and checked for gaps.
Clemente and Robert Adams both found lamination unnecessary.
I was attempting to build a working device with enough output to be undeniable. Many small devices produce so little output that they are impossible to measure with accuracy.
Thanks,
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2013, 04:08:31 PM
iflewmyown,
 
Where is the induced winding? The turns of the induced winding should pass through the air gaps in accordance with the 1902 patent.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 24, 2013, 04:54:23 PM
Bajac, I tried many induced winding patterns months ago, except your fig. 8. The device had been dismantled and stored. I have many devices and limited bench space. When I saw your post I set the unit back up again and ran tests on that configuration. It was stored again by the time you wanted pictures.
I am now building a device with laminations for further testing.
Thanks
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 24, 2013, 07:56:39 PM
A gramme wound seconday two oposing core two primary single ignition coil  potentailly ballanced against the source voltage. Shared cores on a single frame wont make it easier to build. Gramme winds to secure desired voltage/amperage, combined units to secure more amperage.Secondary and primary connected.The question is how and where and is the secondary a floating ground.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on June 26, 2013, 11:40:45 PM
Farmhand,


Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred. The law refers only to the polarity of the coil voltages when induced by magnetic fields.


Bajac

I said " in my opinion" but you state it as fact. I really think you ought to be able to demonstrate an example before stating things as fact.

If Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred, then when people say they have negated Lens Law what exactly does that mean ? And what is the indication that has happened ? Makes me wonder why it's such a problem if it has nothing to do with input compared to output.

Not seeing the input power increase when a load is added is not a negation of Lenz's Law. It's easy to do. I can show several examples and they all show that the output is restricted to less than the input.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 27, 2013, 12:10:20 AM
Hi all,

I don´t know if everyone knows that Tesla himself mentioned the generator of Clemente Figuera in one of his letters.

Tesla sent a letter to his friend Robert Underwood Johnson, editor of Century magazine, after reading a newspaper clip about the discovery of Mr. Figuera in June of 1902. Please see the attached file, written up by Oliver Nichelson, who discovered this letter.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 27, 2013, 12:24:37 AM
There is something strange in this letter whihc I overlooked previously. What is the last statement about ? What is the Pic of Tenerife ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 27, 2013, 12:33:57 AM
I think we need a scan of ORIGINAL Tesla article "The problem of increasing human energy" from 1900 and especially page 200 and further...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 27, 2013, 12:41:21 AM
I said " in my opinion" but you state it as fact. I really think you ought to be able to demonstrate an example before stating things as fact.

If Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred, then when people say they have negated Lens Law what exactly does that mean ? And what is the indication that has happened ? Makes me wonder why it's such a problem if it has nothing to do with input compared to output.

Not seeing the input power increase when a load is added is not a negation of Lenz's Law. It's easy to do. I can show several examples and they all show that the output is restricted to less than the input.

Cheers


Farmhand,


You are comparing oranges with apples. I do not have the time to go over this issue again. But, I would like to say that the polarity of the voltage induced in a coil by a magnetic field is the same either when there is no load (zero current) also know as zero energy transferred, or when the coil is fully loaded (substantial energy being transferred).


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on June 27, 2013, 07:57:49 AM
I think we need a scan of ORIGINAL Tesla article "The problem of increasing human energy" from 1900 and especially page 200 and further...

Probably you don't need the original article. You need this (further explanation of the same author):

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing)

Pic of Teneriffe (Peak of Teneriffe) a peak of a mountain in Teneriffe.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 27, 2013, 11:32:33 AM
Probably you don't need the original article. You need this (further explanation of the same author):

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing)

Pic of Teneriffe (Peak of Teneriffe) a peak of a mountain in Teneriffe.


I'm not sure Qwert  ???  Why would Tesla who was pedantic make such a mistake ? Pic instead of Peak ? Written in capital ? Tenerife with one "f" ?  It's interesting because there is Pic a Tenerife in Canada and it is a mountain which I can assume ( a big assumption) was the place of experiment done by Tesla and his friends described in one article available on net. Ok, maybe it's too far but the mistake was indeed interesting
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 27, 2013, 02:29:18 PM
Tenerife with one "f" ?  It's interesting because there is Pic a Tenerife in Canada and it is a mountain which I can assume ( a big assumption) was the place of experiment done by Tesla and his friends described in one article available on net. Ok, maybe it's too far but the mistake was indeed interesting

Tenerife is the name of one of the Canary Island where Clemente Figuera lived in the time of his first patents in 1902. The peak in Tenerife Island, called Teide Peak, is the tallest mountain in Spain. I think Tesla was thinking that Figuera collected the energy from the medium using high altitutes, which is completely different to the method really used. I know that Tesla always lived in the some of the highest floors in the NY hotels searching for better conditions for some of his experiments during his last years.
 
I don´t know if Tenerife is also the name of another peak in Canada where Tesla did some experiments. Can you provide any link to this info?
 
Regards
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on June 28, 2013, 01:41:13 AM
Probably you are right, Forest: Pic a Tenerife is a mountain in the Newfoundland. But, this is mountain and that is mountain, who cares? Of course it makes significant difference if you gonna visit one of them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2013, 12:25:21 AM
Maybe it is simpler that what we think:

Patent from 1908: "so simple that vigilance can be overlooked"

Herald Tribune (June 1902): [Figuera] declares that the only extraordinary point about it is that is has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact."  .... " the whole apparatus is so simple that a child could work it"

Canarian Newspaper (May 1902): "My invention is based on a simple principle, which is not worth the warm eulogies with which I am honored and distinguished,  I can not understand that anyone did not happen to do what I've been fortunate to achieve"

Interview in a canarian newspaper (June 1902): stating that the secret of his invention resembles the egg of Columbus.

If energy is not created, and it is just moved from one place to another, we may say that a conventional generator is just capturing energy from the surroundings and trasnsforming it into electric energy. Maybe what you need to do is just to imitate a conventional generator, but without moving the stator or rotor and only moving electric charges and magnetic fields, just try rotating the magnetic field, and try electrical load in the tests. Maybe, just with this approach,  it may capture as much electricity as any conventional generator.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 01, 2013, 01:36:18 AM
Figuera mixed notions; it is big difference between transformation and amplification. Transformer does not amplify; amplifier does not transform. And he built a transformer and wanted to amplify. Of course, everything worked perfectly but only in his head, never in reality.

Maybe in combination with another idea there is a chance. Something like this:

http://www.overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg364428/#msg364428

or the same available in PDF: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2011143809.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 01, 2013, 10:42:08 AM
QWERT, why are you doing that ?  :o   Figuera device SURELY worked fine. It is a FACT not our supposition.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 01, 2013, 03:41:10 PM
In an effort to find the device which Tesla claims he already figured that out. The closest one I could find was US433702. Built as a ring two cores over lapped ,one shielded from the other. The other not sheilded on the outside of the shielded one seems to be of some importance as well as the the saturation capabillities being different from one another.Tesla appears to be using a motor where figura used resistance and back to the source. There is a slight statement of a pissy nature that Tesla wants to avoid mutual inductance of the two coils in his device but even when shielded it can if enough magnetic saturation is used in the primary. He also uses a motor with two sets of windings one run by generator the other by the device. He must have been wearing his dancing shoes on that trip to the patent office. There are a few simple facts about electromagnets which cant be argured. More turns of thin wire will produce a stronger magnet without using more current. Thicker wire with fewer turns will produce more induced current but lower voltage for the same strength magnetic feild. A iron core will produce a stronger magnet even more so then more turns of wire will.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2013, 08:12:56 PM
In an effort to find the device which Tesla claims he already figured that out. The closest one I could find was US433702.

Doug,
Certainly it is a curious patent ( "protect in a measure the secondary from the inductive action or effect of the primary by surrounding either the primary or the secondary with a comparatively-thin magnetic shield or screen" http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer) ). What I don´t know if we can say that this patent from 1890 can be related to the essay in the Century Magazine in 1900 "The Problem of Increasing Human Energy"  http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1900-06-00.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1900-06-00.htm) (page 200 as refered by Tesla in his letter is the reference to "novel facts" into the text, search for it ). Such novel facts are described as "that an electric current is generated in a wire extending from the ground to a great height by the axial, and probably also by the translatory, movement of the earth") . For that reason Tesla mentioned that the condition in the Peak of Tenerife were fine for such a method  (Tenerife is the Island where Figuera lived). I am afraid that Tesla were thinking that Figuera captured the atmospheric energy -as reported in the newspapers- by using a kind of antenna to take advantage of the height. In any case, I don´t know if we should look for references to free energy in Tesla´s patents from his first years. Tesla was very smart and if he had discovered in 1890 any small possibility to capture free energy he would  have follow this line of research for sure.

Qwert, Please read into this link all the references to real proofs of the Figuera Generator. http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258) I am sure he got it working. I have a reference where it is said that his house was lit with his generator, and I have heard of some references that Figuera´s plan was to light all the streets in his city (Santa Cruz de Tenerife) with his generator just using the standard wiring but, now,  powered by his generator. I am afraid that he didn´t make many friends in the electrical industry with such statement. He start working on it until he signed the sale of his patents to the banker union in september 1902. Later ...all is silence ... 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2013, 09:01:41 PM
Here it is a link to a Tesla paper where he talks about lag in the magnetic core:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-10.html#post226216 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-10.html#post226216)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 03:18:27 AM
QWERT, why are you doing that ?  :o   Figuera device SURELY worked fine. It is a FACT not our supposition.

According to all available articles, there are only witnesses that Figuera said so; no witness had seen it with his own eyes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on July 02, 2013, 03:58:23 AM
Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 03:53:10 PM
Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.
Garry

Any reference to this info?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 02, 2013, 06:01:08 PM
Quote from: iflewmyown on Today at 03:58:23 AM (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg364514/#msg364514)Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.

Any reference to this info?

This test was carried out in 1913, 5 years after Figuera´s death, because one his partner, Buforn, was kept on trying to commercialize this generator and filed 5 more patents all of them similar to the one from 1908. This test report  is kept in the Patent Office as a proof of practical implementation of the generator, a mandatory step to get the patent granted in those days. This patent was granted. It is a pity that the report of the test doesn´t not include if the machine was self-running apart from producing electricity. What was the reason to follow a dead end after 5 years?  For me it is clear. We have collected many proofs. For anyone who has some doubts:  please read the webpage deeply before going into questions. This test report was already posted in the forum some weeks ago.

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf)

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 07:57:45 PM
This test was carried out in 1913, 5 years after Figuera´s death, because one his partner, Buforn, was kept on trying to commercialize this generator and filed 5 more patents all of them similar to the one from 1908. This test report  is kept in the Patent Office as a proof of practical implementation of the generator, a mandatory step to get the patent granted in those days. This patent was granted. It is a pity that the report of the test doesn´t not include if the machine was self-running apart from producing electricity. What was the reason to follow a dead end after 5 years?  For me it is clear. We have collected many proofs. For anyone who has some doubts:  please read the webpage deeply before going into questions. This test report was already posted in the forum some weeks ago.

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf)

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)



These articles suggest that these patents are complete, while our replicators suggest that these patents must be incomplete. Where is the truth?

Here is an excerpt from the second link's article, the author says:

"I don´t doubt that in the coil induced currents are generated, as he thought, but to pretend that more energy is generated in the coil or set of coils, which is needed to generate the inductive fields, even if they vary over time very rapidly, is an illusion."

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on July 02, 2013, 08:11:23 PM
The patents are complete as possible. I do not believe the operating principle was known to the inventor.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 10:34:45 PM
The patents are complete as possible. I do not believe the operating principle was known to the inventor.
Garry

Oops! That can be true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 03, 2013, 12:48:54 AM
Qwert, The original article about Figuera appeared in January 2011 issue of a History Magazine (Hisotria de Iberia Vieja), as you should have read. This article was done by a historian who researched the life of Clemente Figuera. I met him and I have helped him to get the rest of the patents from the Patent Office Archive and traslate them and his webpage into english in May 2013. This article appeared in an History monthly magazine and thus why he decided to say that no more energy could be generated than used. He did it at first not to show a overunity device but to show the life of this particular character. The rest of the webpage shows that Clemente Figuera was a respected engineer and he knew perfectly what he had between his hands. He powered his own house (lighting) as well as a 20 HP motor with his generator. He didn´t decided to realese the news about his generator, but it was as consequence of people who saw his house and soon the reporter were interested in his generator. His idea was to keep it secret until filing the patent , but the news was spread 5 months before filing the patents. I know all of this because I have some more newspaper clippings where I can guest that story, mainly they are just historic references to Figuera while the only source of technical info are his patents. There are many proofs, maybe there are much more proofs than in many others OU devices. I am not going to convince you. I have told all this for people who are really interested in Mr. Figuera´s invention. I am moving forward. Bye

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 03, 2013, 06:52:33 AM
...There are many proofs, maybe there are much more proofs than in many others OU devices. I am not going to convince you. I have told all this for people who are really interested in Mr. Figuera´s invention. I am moving forward. Bye



I'm also not going to convince anybody; my conclusions are only based on info available on internet. Maybe there are more proofs but for today, there are no more proofs. My quote at one of the previous posts (reply #164) comes from a link you, (hanon) provided. Don't hesitate to provide better source if you have such.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 03, 2013, 04:42:44 PM
hanon


Once again I want to say : THANK YOU for Your GREAT WORK !
And to all who investigated time and resources to re-vive Clemente Figuera history . Looks like there is real hope we recreate all free energy lost devices, because that was my small dream to dig out all info about Figuera life and story and you and author of original Spanish article fullfilled that dream ....It was almost like discovery of ancient pharaon tomb, really so deep in darkness and distance from our today life was forgotten Mr Clemente Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Overschuss on July 03, 2013, 05:15:37 PM
hanon


Once again I want to say : THANK YOU for Your GREAT WORK !
And to all who investigated time and resources to re-vive Clemente Figuera history . [...]


I second that. Thanks a lot, hanon !

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 04, 2013, 12:46:36 AM
Hi all,

Here I have traslated some letters that Clemente Figuera sent in 1902 to the newspapers. You can follow cronologically the sequence of events prior to the filing of the 4 patents in September 1902. Before filing the patents there are some references in the newspaper (in april- may - june 1902) . Later he filed the patents  in the 20th of september 1902, and, four days later he signed the sale of the patents to an international banker union. Later... all is silence ... until the 1908 patent few days before his death.

It is curious to note that Mr. Figuera said many times that the principle os his invention is very simple.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 04, 2013, 01:53:50 PM
Hi,
 
For people who may read spanish texts, you can find many more newspapers clippings about Clemente Figuera. I have just translated some of them, but spanish readers will enjoy for sure reading all those documents. --> search for Newspaper report II at the bottom side of the page.
 
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on July 05, 2013, 02:29:04 AM
Hello Hanon,

I watch this topic since 3 Days and one question might be of interest: What was the technique for building electromagnets at 1900 ? What kind of core-material was used ?
Why do I ask this seemingly trivial questions ? Reason : Remanence.
We have to check all paramters in order to get closer to a solution.

I found this here, it is in german but you can see all details: core is plain iron.. so we will have remance:

http://www.ebay.de/itm/LEHRMITTEL-Spulen-Magnet-ELEKTROMAGNET-Physik-EXPERIMENTE-Unterricht-Schule-/360488430954 (http://www.ebay.de/itm/LEHRMITTEL-Spulen-Magnet-ELEKTROMAGNET-Physik-EXPERIMENTE-Unterricht-Schule-/360488430954)

I do not believe that Figuera was using stacked core-material

Second question to focus on  : did Figuera use U-shaped core-material so he  had both rows of electromagnets influencing each other if current was changed ?
The patent does not give an answer which means more effort to spend on experiments.

Last thought about the magnetic flux-density across the gap where the laod-coils are place within.
My impression is: the overall magnetic tension across the gap is not changing, only the density of the fieldlines exiting the frontside of each S and N- core changes. This would mean that the load-coil in between the two pole-faces would get a massage with changing flux-field-density moving with each step form left to right and back again. So in this way there will be generated a potential-difference between both terminal of the load-coil y with one exeption: if the partial-currents for S and N-coils are equal. If this is the case than this would only make sense with a longer load-coil in order to have this effect. This gives a clue of the probable physical dimension of the set-up.
In other words: a constant change of flux-field-density between right and left pole-face of the load-coil is created while the overall magnetic tension in the gap is constant thus reduced Lenz-action. Because of the slow reacting iron-material there is also a smoothing out sharp voltage-peaks caused by the discrete steps of the commutator-brush

Just some thoughts of mine.

Regards

Kator01

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 05, 2013, 10:35:33 PM
Hi Kator,

The only source of technical info about Figuera´s devices are his 5 patents. There it is clearly stated that the cores were composed of soft iron. I think that the idea was to has a composition which could react quickly to the changes in the magnetization. The aim was to create a changing magnetic field in the electromagnets to try to emulate a normal magnet that is spinning inside a generator (N,S,N,S,N,S,...)

In some newspapers is written that Figuera ask for some material to a german company. I think he was looking for very pure iron. The purer the iron the greater the magnetic permeability , therefore, the stronger the filed created  (check in this link the huge increase in the magnetic permeability:

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeabilidad_magn%C3%A9tica (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeabilidad_magn%C3%A9tica)

The best source of technical details are his patents. You can find them in the webpage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 06, 2013, 02:48:34 AM
I consider the air gaps the most important feature of the Figuera's devices. It is against the common sense used in today's electric machines. For example, the discontinuities of the iron cores represented by the air gaps is to be avoided at all cost in today's standard transformers. Nevertheless, the discontinuity of the air gaps is what makes Figuera's devices work. The air gaps must be minimum, but they must exist. These air gaps create a reluctance circuit that allows the magnetic flux to be manipulated with ease for the purpose of minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law.


The above statement implies that the quality of the iron material is not critical. The reluctance of the small air gaps is thousands of times larger than the reluctance of any low quality iron core. The latter is also the reason why the design criteria of the Figuera's apparatus is based around the air gaps.


No considerable amount of power can be obtained without the air gaps feature. If you don't believe me, ask Thane and the BiTT transformer.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Liberty on July 06, 2013, 05:35:39 AM
I consider the air gaps the most important feature of the Figuera's devices. It is against the common sense used in today's electric machines. For example, the discontinuities of the iron cores represented by the air gaps is to be avoided at all cost in today's standard transformers. Nevertheless, the discontinuity of the air gaps is what makes Figuera's devices work. The air gaps must be minimum, but they must exist. These air gaps create a reluctance circuit that allows the magnetic flux to be manipulated with ease for the purpose of minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law.


The above statement implies that the quality of the iron material is not critical. The reluctance of the small air gaps is thousands of times larger than the reluctance of any low quality iron core. The latter is also the reason why the design criteria of the Figuera's apparatus is based around the air gaps.


No considerable amount of power can be obtained without the air gaps feature. If you don't believe me, ask Thane and the BiTT transformer.


Bajac

Anyone able to make one self run?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 06, 2013, 05:27:02 PM
It's been non stop rain here for days which has put a real damper getting much done.So I spent time pulling apart a 10kw inverter that failed to see why before gutting it for parts. As I was examining the transformers all 16 of them I decided to take one totally apart. They are EDT-39's ,much to my surprise they'er not wound with wire they use copper tape windings.Vastly easier to wind or rewind. The tape fills the bobin width and turns are layered. A funny thing though they are wound a bit like the Figuera's device with two differences. They use a single core made from a split core,two E cores really..The coils are layed on top of each other. As if the first is a primary ,second the induced secondary, then another primary over that.The induced secondary is center tap while the primaries are not, just to be clear. Im pretty sure that is to do with it putting out ac and to increase the self inductance of the coil. The cores are made of very nice material ferrite. It would be very easy to cut the tape in thirds width and add an air gap but there is no complete discription of how the Figuera's device is wound or if he used center tap winding on the induced. Maybe someone can find out when the center tap idea came about in history. Such as who discovered it and when. I know the inverter tech works and allways wondered how those little transformers could handle such large currents now I know. They use copper tape not wire. The insulator is just a slightly wider piece of thin plastic sheet. The tape is not coated nor bonded to the plastic insulator.Copper tape is short only a couple of feet each winding,very easy to work with very fast.I never would have considered tape before this now I may never again use wire the labor difference is too great to overlook. It would very funny if an DC to AC inverter is only a couple of tweeks away from being the finish product. I imagine there will be more pissed off people then can be counted.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 07, 2013, 03:27:19 PM
I decided to take a closer look at how these transformers are connected to the cuircuit board becuase something just didnt look right in the solder on the board.Some of the pin holes apeared to to clean ,virgin. I kept placing one transformer back in it's place and realized two pins were missing ,cipped off.In fact the same two pins on each of the 16 transformers are  nipped off at the ends so it doesnt reach the holes on the board.The outer most winding is only connected to the board from one end of the winding but made to look like it is connected at both. It would be easy to miss unless you noticed the defect is the same on all of them. Thats pretty strange.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on July 08, 2013, 07:06:17 AM
I blieve in the quest of the true hearted explorers, and laugh at the non-believers. this that I do has been done for centuries. the only thing that needs to be overcome is the BIG BANKS, THE Government THAT HAS BEEN BOUGHt<NOW MY COMPUTER WILL NOT WORK RIGHT FOR THE FIRST TIME>
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 15, 2013, 02:14:21 PM
Hi all,

As maybe you know there are two parellels forums about Clemente Figuera, one is this one, and the other is at energeticforum dot com. There is a question in energeticforum about the formulation of the Law of Induction. One formulation states that the magnetic lines  (B field) must cut perpendiculary to the moving wire (at speed "v")  of length "l" to produce induction E = (v x B) · l ·sin(alpha) , while the other formualtion E = - N·A·(dB/dt)  is related to the area A of the coil and no "cutting" of wire is needed to produce induction.

For those interested:  an interesting fact about the Induction Law here I link a file which explains that two different formulations seem to exist for the same phenomenon : one,  the Faraday Unipolar generator: E = (v · B) , other the Maxwell 2nd Law :   rot E = -dB/dt, which are two different formulations for the same law !!! Faraday-or-Maxwell by Meyl (http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Faraday-or-Maxwell.pdf) (read page 5 and next of the file). Meyl proposes a theory to take into account the longitudinal waves which were predicted by Tesla in his wireless power transmission system.

An interesting point which Eric Dollard comments in an old presentation  (Youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH3ETTd6bPI#t=38m58s) ) is that in the secondary of transformers the induced current is produced  in the wiring WITHOUT being cut by the magnetic field. Most of the magnetism is supposed to be enclosed into the iron magnetic circuit and therefore no magnetism should cut the secondary winding, which is external to the iron and only encircles the iron. Can anyone explain it to me???

Please comment if you see any inconsistency or error in my sketch. Maybe we are trying to explain it with the equation E = v·B·l·sin(alpha) ,and we should look for any other equation which fits better this phenomenon.
 
 Another doubt that I have is why this equation does not work by approacing o moving away a single conductor from a magnet, while the common Faraday equation E = N·A·(dB/dt) works perfectly with a coil approaching or moving away from a magnet.  Why the area (A) is included into this equation if the central lines of forces (inside the area) do not "touch" the surrounding conductor?? For me it would make more sense to use the perimeter instead the area, don´t you?.... I think we still have some misteries to solve around Magnetism !!!
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 19, 2013, 08:47:30 PM
I have found this patent US20020125774 which has some features in common with one of Figuera´s patents: Link (http://www.google.com/patents/US20020125774)
 
 In fact they both have different wiring disposition but it can be one other implementation of the motionless generator described into patent No. 30378
 
 Regards
 
 PS. Also a curious video I have seen: TPU Secret - Steven Mark (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8asKJNYJIY)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 20, 2013, 04:51:07 PM

“No single solution will defuse more of the Energy-Climate Era’s problems at once than the invention of a source of single solution on abundant, clean, reliable, and cheap electrons. Give me abundant, clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will give you a world that can continue to grow without triggering unmanageable climate change. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will give you water in the desert from a deep generator-powered well. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will put every petrodictator out of business. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will end deforestation from communities desperate for fuel and I will eliminate any reason to drill in Mother Nature’s environmental cathedrals. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will enable millions of the earth’s poor to get connected, to refrigerate their medicines, to educate their women, and to light up their nights.”

 Thomas Friedman in “Hot, Flat, and Crowded” 2008
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 31, 2013, 10:49:55 AM
The site rexresearch.com has included a page with many info about Clemente Figuera:
 
http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 09, 2013, 03:11:47 AM
John,
There is a very important aspect to be aware of when designing the 1902’s device. The effective wire length, in which voltage is induced, is equal to the distance of the iron core’s depth. In other words, a turn of wire crosses the air gaps twice in the direction of the depth of the iron core inducing two times the voltage. I noticed that the depth of the iron core shown by iflewmyown looks small. I thought you might want to take the latter into consideration.
Hanon,
Thank you very much for your incredible contribution!!!
 Bajac  [/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 13, 2013, 10:03:45 AM
Hi RMatt,

The circuit described by Patrick Kelly in his ebook is fine to do the work and easy to be built ( http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/) )but it has some mistakes in the connections. Please see the scheme I have attached to this post for a correct configuration. I have just built the counters. I am waiting for the darlinton transistors to complete the circuit.

Good luck!!

Hi all,
This is a post to correct some errors in the circuit that I posted in post #106 in the 15th of May. Please see the attached file with the correct circuit to implement two unphased signals as defined in the 1908 Figuera´s patent.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 13, 2013, 01:48:01 PM
Hanon,
Did you build and test the circuit?
My only concern is about the transition of the switching transistors. If the transition is not of the type make-before-break, then there might be an issue.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 13, 2013, 05:33:57 PM
In Patrick Kelly's ebook it stated :

The capacitor “C” in the above circuit diagram will probably not be needed. The switching needs to maintain a constant current flow through both electromagnets. I would expect the 4017 chip switching to be fast enough to allow this to happen. If that proves not to be the case, then a small capacitor (probably 100nF or less) can delay the switch-off of the transistors just long enough to allow the next transistor in the sequence to be switched on to provide the required ‘Make-Before-Break’ switching.

Maybe this might help?
"C" is connected between the base (input signal) and emitter (ground) of each Darlington Pair (NPN).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 13, 2013, 11:56:23 PM
Hi bajac,

I have not yet tested this circuit but I will do it soon because I start my vacations in few days. By now I have put my effort in replicating the 1902 patent. I have built 6 coils with a core of a low carbon steel (I couldn´t find soft iron!!) with 0.1%C and 300 turns of 1 mm diameter wire. I am in the process of testing with AC and soon I will also try with pulsed current. By now I haven´t found any incredible result, but I have to do more tests before taking some conclusions. After testing with pulsed current I will move to the 2 signals as described in the 1908 patent.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 14, 2013, 02:35:27 AM
Hanon,


The recommendation from RMatt is valid. Once you build your circuit, test the signals using an oscilloscope. If the on-time of the transistors during switching does not overlap, you can add small capacitors to the input of the transistors. You can test with different capacitance values until you get the correct signal.
I also would like to ask you if you can publish some photos of your progress work.


Thank you,
Bajac. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 17, 2013, 05:00:28 PM
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually mean south and north pole faces. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces.The need for seperate core peices is so the field caused by the pulse "on" travels through the other two coils opposite (y+n)or (s+n)so the direction of induction on the center coil and the off coil are the same. Current is added back in series with the on impulse acting upon the off coil through the power source. So if the on impulse was 12 volts + the field would project through the two other core peices and coils.The reaction on the center coil would act like half a sign wave be it up or down. The outer coil which is off would induce in reverse direction of it's on state at a lower voltage or amperage but would add to the source voltage in series.A clever way to use as much of the field as possible drawing in and using the lesser force on the far side of the induced coil used to power the load. Im not sure if enough current could be produced to remove the starting power source or not. The only way that could work is if there is unequal abillity of inducing a magnetic field in a core piece when comparing voltage to ampere. Meaning if I use 1 volt and 100 amp on a core will it be the same measure of gauss field as compared to 1 amp and 100 volts using identical cores and windings. So that the load could be used in part as a source once it is started even if that ment it has to be stepped up or down to add to the impulse field the strongest magnetic field that it can produce without taking away from the productitvity of operating the load.Boy that was a bitch to explain that thought.

Doug,

As I answered you I had already noted that in the whole text of the 1908 patent there is no reference where it is explicitly stated that "N" means north and "S" south. In fact it is just written: " Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and S. Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small). " .

 Even in none of the 5 later patents from Buforn it is clearly stated the orientation of the N and S electromagnets...which is curious because you could think that in the last patents maybe Buforn could have clarified this important point instead of barely mentioning it. Buforn always wrote almost the same as Figuera about the N and S electromagnets.

Studying your proposal more deeply I have also noted that in the patent text is written a sentence which match with your explanation that the current in the "OFF" coil adds to the input current in the "ON" coil. In the patent it is written: "As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken". Buforn also states that: "the current which crosses the magnetic field produced by the electromagnets, current which -after doing its function- returns to the origin where it has been taken". Buforn also states:" .... The electricity moves on the magnetic field and returns from it by the two opposite INLET and OUTLET sides of the resistor." (Buforn patent No. 57955, page 12)

Until now we were thinking that the resistor has only one way (current going into the electromagnets). Maybe we were mistaken and the resistor is a doble way path for the electricity to come into the "ON" coil, and to return after being induced in the "OFF" coil if like poles of the electromagnets are in front of each other ....

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 18, 2013, 11:39:39 PM
Hi all,
 
 About the discussion if like poles are facing each other in the 1908 Figuera patent I have thought in the next scheme. Please share your thoughts about the possibilities of success of this proposal.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 19, 2013, 06:35:49 PM
 Hi all,
After a discussion with one of the forum members, I realized that an explanation is in order. The legacy of Mr. Figuera is that he showed us two methods in his 1902 and 1908 patents for mitigating the effects of the Lenz's law. The 1902 method teaches that the influence of the induced magnetic field can be minimized if the inducing and induced coils are placed symmetrically at an angle of 90 degrees. The requirement for symmetry is important because it is the condition that balances the magnetic fields entering and leaving the inducing coil (interior), and therefore, it helps on cancelling any induced voltage in the inducing coil (interior coil) due to the reaction of the induced coil (exterior coil).
The second method of 1908, on the other hand, consists in pulling the induced magnetic field ("y" electromagnets) away from the inducing electromagnets ("N" and "S" electromagnets) by applying two voltages 90 degrees out of phase. Even though the 1902 method is much simpler to implement, it is my belief that the 1908 method is more efficient. The reason for being more efficient is that the 1908 method does not suffer any decrease in performance as the load increases. However, a performance degradation can be expected of the 1902 method due to some symmetry loss whenever the device is loaded. The interaction of the inducing and induced magnetic fields bends and shifts the resultant magnetic field. The distortion of the resultant magnetic field is considered a common event for all electrical machines. For instance, the DC motors use "compensating coils" for minimizing it. And, maybe the same compensating coil concept can be used with the 1902 method. The latter is also the reason why the efficiency of the 1902 device should be tested by incrementing the load gradually from zero up to 100%.
I was able to verify that the currents flowing in the N and S electromagnets are not affected by the load connected to the "y" electromagnets. For example, a while ago I published the data of one of my experiments in which I had 1.3A DC flowing in the N and S electromagnets. The 1.3A did not change even when the "y' electromagnet was short circuited. The experiment was also validated by Woopy in one of the videos he posted in Youtube.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 19, 2013, 07:00:49 PM
Hi bajac,
Which do you think would work better? Doug1's thoughts about  N, S, and Y, or what is in Patrick Kelly's ebook.
(Clemente's work is in chapter 3)
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: v8karlo on August 19, 2013, 09:11:36 PM
Just my opinion..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2013, 12:12:57 AM
RMatt,


Could you be more specific to what embodiments you are referring to?


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 12:33:56 AM
Wooohoooo I think we have solved it !  I mean : lasts posts explain everything !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 20, 2013, 12:48:39 AM
Hi all,
After a discussion with one of the forum members, I realized that an explanation is in order. The legacy of Mr. Figuera is that he showed us two methods in his 1902 and 1908 patents for mitigating the effects of the Lenz's law. The 1902 method teaches that the influence of the induced magnetic field can be minimized if the inducing and induced coils are placed symmetrically at an angle of 90 degrees. The requirement for symmetry is important because it is condition that balances the magnetic field entering and leaving the inducing coil (interior), and therefore, it helps on cancelling any induced voltage in the inducing coil (interior coil) due to the reaction of the induced coil (exterior coil).
The second method of 1908, on the other hand, consists in pulling the induced magnetic field ("y" electromagnets) away from the inducing electromagnets ("N" and "S" electromagnets) by applying two voltages 90 degrees out of phase. Even though the 1902 method is much simpler to implement, it is my belief that the 1908 method is more efficient. The reason for being more efficient is that the 1908 method does not suffer any decrease in performance as the load increases. However, a performance degradation can be expected of the 1902 method due to some symmetry loss whenever the device is loaded. The interaction of the inducing and induced magnetic fields bends and shifts the resultant magnetic field. It is considered a common event for all electrical machines. For instance, the DC motors use "compensating coils" for minimizing it. And, maybe the same compensating coil concept can be used with the 1902 method. The latter is also the reason why the efficiency of the 1902 device should be tested by incrementing the load gradually from zero up to 100%.
I was able to verify that the currents flowing in the N and S electromagnets are not affected by the load connected to the "y" electromagnets. For example, a while ago I published the data of one of my experiments in which I had 1.3A DC flowing in the N and S electromagnets. The 1.3A did not change even when the "y' electromagnet was short circuited. The experiment was also validated by Woopy in one of the videos he posted in Youtube.
Bajac

Hi,
I guess that maybe Figuera had to redesign his original generator (1902) to skip the censorship after selling his patents to a banker union in 1902. He surely sell the patent and he was under a non-disclosure agreement. That´s why he and his generator disappeared from the public from 1902 to 1908.

Later he noted that the bankers were hiding his discovery and he had to re-design his genrator in order to bring it into the market. I think that he achieved a new design around 1907 or 1908, he maybe tried to delayed his last patent the more he could (note: in the 1908 patent is written that he waited for filing the patent until he got running his generator) . In 1908 he filed his patent and he died few days later. Maybe he was ill so he decided to file the patent before dying as a legacy, as a way to assure some incomes from his discovery and as a way to protect the business he had with Buforn, his associate in those years. I suppose that he was ill because he lived in the same city where it was the patent office and instead of filing the patent by himself and taking it to the office he sent to Constantino de Buforn as his representative. This could be an indication that he was quite ill at that moment, and he couldn´t leave his home to carry the patent to the office. But all of these ideas are just my suppositions.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 01:45:18 AM
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:


"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "


This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2013, 02:41:01 AM
I also thought about the 3-phase line reactors such as this one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/R-HOGENKAMP-3-UI-60-a-3-PHASE-LINE-REACTOR-BV-10833A-/380187334031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5884ee558f (http://www.ebay.com/itm/R-HOGENKAMP-3-UI-60-a-3-PHASE-LINE-REACTOR-BV-10833A-/380187334031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5884ee558f)


The core of the reactors can be cut to produce the "N", "S", and "y" electromagnets. Then, it would be relatively easy to reproduce the 1908 device.


What do you think?


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: e2matrix on August 20, 2013, 03:31:02 AM
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:


"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "


This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !
forest this may or may not be what you want but you do know about :  translate.google.com  ?  It auto recognizes the language and translates to whatever other language you want.   From google this is their translation:  If within a magnetic field is rotated a closed, placed perpendicular to the lines of force in said circuit born induced currents that will last as long as the duration of the movement, and whose sign depends on the direction in which semueva the armature circuit. "  I believe semueva is se mueva which means 'move'.    Or straight from his patent 'background' :  "if within a spinning magnetic field we rotate a closed circuit placed at right angles to the lines of force a current will be induced for as long as there is movement , and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the induced circuit moves."  says it more clearly. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 10:10:52 AM
what is that ?  "within a spinning magnetic field " ? is that really in patent in original text ?  what means SPINNING ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tagor on August 20, 2013, 01:13:48 PM
what is that ?  "within a spinning magnetic field " ? is that really in patent in original text ?  what means SPINNING ?


<<
Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "
>>

en francais :

si dans un champ magnetique on fait tourner un circuit fermé , ce circuit étant placé perpendiculairement au ligne de force du champ , dans ce meme circuit se créé un courant induit qui durera tant que le mouvement se prolonge et
le signe de ce courant dépend du sens de rotation du dit circuit

google translate

if in a magnetic field is rotated a closed circuit, this circuit being placed perpendicularly to the line of force of the field, in this circuit an induced current is created which will last as long as the movement continues, and
the sign of the current depends on the direction of the system's rotation
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 20, 2013, 01:44:51 PM
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:


"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "


This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !

Man-made translation:

"If, within a magnetic field, a closed circuit, placed perpendicularly to the line of force, is rotated, in this circuit will appear induced currents which will last as long as the movement continues, and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the system is moving"

I think you have taken this sentence from Buforn´s patents ( http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf) ) which are only written in spanish. I have been reading them carefully and ALL of them (5 patents) have almost the same exact text. The more mind-blowing sentences are those that I translated in my previous posts. Buforn try to explain more in depth the relation betwen both rows of electromagnets which are related by induction (which is not written in Figuera patent), and he just finally say simply that to collect the induced current a coil can be placed between the electromagnets. Previously he had defined the electromagnet just calling them N and S without any further explanation about its poles.

If I have time I will try to translate at least the one or two most important pages from one of the Buforn patent´s (sorry for not translating the whole patent but each one has around 20-25 pages, basically explaining many different things as the magnetic field of the Earth, the influence of the Sun over the Earth sending energy which can be capture by the atmosphere (ionosphere) and the rest captured by the ground. He even refers to the Tesla´s experiments of sending energy wireless to long distances (which proves that he was aware in 1914 of the test developed some year before in America by Tesla...). One important thing mentioned by Buforn is that the generator does not suffer from the Lenz Law  (which was never mentioned in 1908 by Figuera). In one of Buforn´s patents he called Lesen , in another one Leuz. I don´t know if it was just a typing error by the person in charge of transcribing the text or that Buforn didn´t know how it was correctly written the name of Lenz.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: PiCéd on August 20, 2013, 01:50:35 PM
The 191st post is interesting, just hope that the current does not return to the primary with several connections of this type. :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 20, 2013, 01:53:29 PM
Hi bajac,
Which do you think would work better? Doug1's thoughts about  N, S, and Y, or what is in Patrick Kelly's ebook.
(Clemente's work is in chapter 3)
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf)

Hi Rmatt,

I can say you that all the info included in Patrick Kelly´s ebook abouth the Figuera interpretation was released by Bajac in one of the first posts of this thread. You can search for the pdf document uploaded by Bajac.  For new users I have searched for the Bajac´s post  (post #55) where the explanation is attached as a pdf file:

http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg346032/#msg346032 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg346032/#msg346032)


Later on, Kelly designed a circuit to acomplish the task to create the two signals in the resistor, and he added it to his ebook.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: PiCéd on August 20, 2013, 02:11:25 PM
(Aïe) I probably forgot that it worked only in resonance frequency. ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 20, 2013, 05:47:38 PM
(I am no expert in electronics, just interested in electronics for about 40 years. I did go to school for computer electronics about 18 years ago, but have forgotten alot since then. Anyway, back to the fun stuff.)
Doug stated:
"Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces."
In the ebook it shows N for North, S for South. They are alligned with N and S facing. It goes on to explain that the current rotates around the coils.
That is what I was refering to earlier.
Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2013, 06:23:50 PM
RMatt,
There is no rotation of the magnetic field or the currents in the 1902 and 1908 Figuera's devices. I do not understand why some people keep referring to a rotating field. The principle of these devices is the same transformer action used in todays transformers. A voltage is induced due to a change in intensity of the magnetic field. It does not have to rotate.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 20, 2013, 07:27:25 PM
Hannon yhank you .I see where you answered my question I must of missed it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 20, 2013, 07:43:29 PM
Spinning a magnet or anything ells is in the background section of the patent not in the discription of operation for the device being patented. It is his way to explain how generators or dynos work and why, to set up in the text of the discription what makes his different.
 In the discription it states:
The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial
induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it
matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of
the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them;
but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained
electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve
the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any
inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine."[/font][/size][/font][/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 09:14:10 PM
I know Doug, but "spinning" took my attention because it resemble the way I look at magnetic field. I don't know why picture in Figuera patent seems to differs from description, however...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 21, 2013, 12:10:13 AM
The way I see it is that Figuera is still referring to the prior arts in the description part of the patent. The prior art being the existing technology of the day, which consisted in generating electricity by using rotating generators. In his patents, Figuera clearly states that his generator does not require moving parts. The small motor shown in the 1908 patent was used to generate the two (90-degree shifted) voltages. It should be noted that the way the these voltages are generated is not part of the inventive concept. It is just an embodiment showing a way for implementing the inventive concept.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 21, 2013, 12:39:35 AM
TRANSLATION OF KEY PARTS OF BUFORN PATENT No. 57955 (1914) (text extracted from pages 12,13 and 14)


By using a magnetic field, consisting of two series of electromagnets N and S, a resistor and a circumference of contacts isolated from each other .....

...

Note that only the contacts located in the Northerm semicircle are in communication with half of the end sides of each resistor, and the contacts in the South semicircunference are not in communication with the resistor, but respectively with the contacts in the semicircle communicated with half of the end sides of each resistor, and inasmuch as the current moves on the the magnetic field and returns from it  by the input and output sides of the resistor, and as this field is composed of two series of electromagnets N and S , therefore, and as result of the operation of the device when the electromagnets N are full of current, the electromagnets S are empty, and as the current flowing through them is reducing or increasing in intensity according it passes by more or less turns of the resistor, and therefore, in continuous variation;  since we have done a continuous and organized variation we have achieved a constant change in the current which crosses the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets N and S and whose current, after completing their task  in the difrerent electromagnets, returns to the source where it was taken.

...

We have already achieved to produce the continuous and organized change of the intensity of the current which crosses the magnetic field.

 ....

The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it, because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we call inducers,  another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire.

....

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be produced , as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all purposes you want.


http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original spanish text:

Valiéndose de un campo magnético, compuesto de dos series de electroimanes N y S, de una resistencia y de una circunferencia de contactos aislados uno de otro .....

...

Hay que tener presente que unicamente están en comunicación las delgas de la semicincunferencia Norte con la mitad de los extremos de las partes de la resistencia y las de la semicircunferencia Sur no se comunican con la resistencia, sino respectivamente con las delgas de la semicircunferencia comunicadas con la mitad de los extremos de las espiras de la resistencia y además como quiera que la corriente pasa al campo magnético y vuelve del mismo por los extremos de entrada y salida de la resistencia y como este campo está constituido por dos series de electroimanes N y S, resulta que en virtud de lo expuesto y del funcionamiento del aparato, cuando los electroimanes N están llenos de corriente , los S, están vacíos y como la corriente que los atraviesa va aminorando o aumentando en intensidad según pase por mas o menos espiras de la resistencia, y por tanto en variación continua y puesto que esa función hemos logrado hacerla continua y ordenada habremos conseguido el cambio constante de la intensidad de la corriente que atraviesa el campo magnético formado por los electroimanes N y S y cuya corriente una vez cumplida su misión en los diferentes electroimanes vuelve al origen de  donde se ha tomado.

...

Hemos conseguido ya producir el cambio continuo y ordenado de la intensidad de la corriente que atraviesa el campo magnético.
 
....

El modo de recoger esta corriente es tan facil que hasta parece excusado explicarlo; pues no tendremos más que intercalar entre cada par de electroimanes N y S, que llamaremos inductores, otro electroimán, que denominaremos inducido, de tal modo debidamente colocado que, o bien los extremos de su núcleo entre en el seno de los correspondientes inductores y en contacto con sus respectivos núcleos o bien aproximados inducido e inductor y en contacto por los polos, pero sin que en ningún caso haya comunicación alguna entre el devanado inducido y el devanado inductor.

....

Además se puede aprovechar tambien el seno  de los núcleos de los electroimanes inducidos en los que se puede colocar otro electroimán inducido de reducidas dimensiones y con igual o mayor longitud que el núcleo del inducido grande. En estos segundos inducidos, se producirá corriente eléctrica e industrial al mismo tiempo que en los primeros; y la corriente así producida podrá ser suficiente para el gasto de excitación continua de la máquina, quedando completamente libre toda la otra corriente producida por los primeros inducidos para dedicarla a toda clase de fines que se desee.

http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on August 21, 2013, 01:26:27 AM
Hello hanon,

I do not know what´s wrong but I do not see any graphics at rexresearch since a few months. This might be some failure at some of the german servers. If I specifically open a graphic or pic ( show graphic ) I get the following URL:

http://rexresearch.com/badbotnopage.htm (http://rexresearch.com/badbotnopage.htm)

I looks like rexresearch regards my visit as beeing a bad robot and blocking it. Viewing the text is not affected.

anybody here who has the same experience ?

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 21, 2013, 03:07:03 AM
Kator01,

You may want to try this page:
http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 22, 2013, 01:13:06 PM
TRANSLATION OF KEY PARTS OF BUFORN PATENT No. 57955 (1914) (text extracted from pages 12,13 and 14)


By using a magnetic field, consisting of two series of electromagnets N and S, a resistor and a circumference of contacts isolated from each other .....
...
Note that only the contacts located in the Northern semicircle are in communication with half of the end sides of each resistor, and the contacts in the Southern semicircunference are not in communication with the resistor...

Why does he call it "Northern semicircle"?  It is curious how Buforn defines that the "Northern semicircle" is in communication with the resistor but not the "southern semicircle", don´t you think so?. Please see the attached picture. It seems that the he places the North in the upper part of the sketch (as usually happens in maps). If so, the electromagnets may be are labelled according to their orientation: N facing North and S facing South ... Just an idea....I really don´t know

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 22, 2013, 05:48:14 PM
well well well I have strong suspicion that we missed the point....





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 22, 2013, 06:15:34 PM
Hanon,
The rotary switch shown by Figuera in the 1908 patent is correct when using only a contact. The patent that Buforn submitted requires two contact in opposite directions (at 180 degrees.) Otherwise, a single contact needs to rotates 180 degrees before making connection with the resistors and it will make it difficult to have a make-before-break configuration. I do not trust Buforn's work!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 22, 2013, 06:20:41 PM
Actually, if you refer to the upper left corner of the sketch you can see that Buforn is repeating the contact sequence required for a single switch similar to the 1908 patent. Then, the "Northern semicircle" refers to the upper part of the rotary switch and not to the polarity of the electromagnets. KEEP FOCUS GUYS!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 22, 2013, 09:22:25 PM
Hanon,
The rotary switch shown by Figuera in the 1908 patent is correct when using only a contact. The patent that Buforn submitted requires two contact in opposite directions (at 180 degrees.) Otherwise, a single contact needs to rotates 180 degrees before making connection with the resistors and it will make it difficult to have a make-before-break configuration. I do not trust Buforn's work!
Bajac
Hi,
Can you elaborate why in Buforn's patents two contacts are required?

From the documents I have collected in 1907, one year before Figuera's death, Buforn and Figuera were already associated. After Figuera's death the 1908 patent was owned by Buforn. Later he filed 5 patents, which are identical between them, and almost a carbon copy of the 1908 patent (as it can be seen comparing their identical figures.., the resistor, the conmutator, the electromagnets names...all the same. Thus is why I think that we can find some missing details into Buforn's patent and their sketches.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2013, 12:38:42 AM
Hanon,


Why do you think that the puzzle has not been solved? This is probably the simplest of all FE devices that I have ever seen. I thought that I had clearly explained the basis of operation for this device. In my opinion the only task left is to build the apparatus.


I have seen persons complaining that the device did not work but when they posted the photos, their setup is not what Figuera taught. They just made short cuts that are not recommended. I keep repeating myself, JUST REPLICATE THE DEVICE AS SHOWN IN THE PATENTS!!! Plain and simple.


Why are we still wasting time with something like looking for the meaning of "N" and "S"? Stop this analysis paralysis until the device has been really replicated.


If the device does not work after its replication, then we can go into the troubleshooting mode. I am kind of disappointed that no one has replicated this simple device (including myself).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on August 23, 2013, 01:42:44 AM
Bajac,  You yourself have in no way replicated the 1908 patent and yet you keep talking. The 1908 patent was for a 20 hp generator and used a mechanical rotating commutator. Your own pictures do not show a rotating commutator or a device anywhere near 20 hp. I await your replication and some test results. The reason people still look for answers is that none of us have solved this puzzle, simple as it may be. 
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2013, 02:25:12 AM
Bajac,  You yourself have in no way replicated the 1908 patent and yet you keep talking. The 1908 patent was for a 20 hp generator and used a mechanical rotating commutator. Your own pictures do not show a rotating commutator or a device anywhere near 20 hp. I await your replication and some test results. The reason people still look for answers is that none of us have solved this puzzle, simple as it may be. 
Garry


Garry,


The important question is: what is the invention? Can you isolate Figuera's inventive concept from the implementation details? For instance, suppose that someone else build the generator using the same configuration of the Figuera's electromagnets as shown in the 1908 patent but instead of using a rotary switch, this person uses a stepper motor driver to generate the two 90 degrees shifted signals. Is this person infringing Figuera's patent if the 1908 claims include the rotary switch? Do you really believe that the rotary switch is part of the inventive concept? I will leave it up to you as a homework but I can give you a hint: refer to the oscilloscope's graphs published by Woopy using a rotary switch and the graphs that I published using an electronic circuit (Arduino controller) to generate the signals.


The above questions are for brainstorming, only. You do not need to reply because I will not waste more time on this issue.


It looks like you did not understand what I was referring to when I said "replicate Figuera's apparatus".


Bajac

PS: I am planning to take a long vacation away from the forum. However, there is more than enough information posted (for you guys) to build this wonderful apparatus.




 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 23, 2013, 04:15:24 AM
Hi all,
We are in this forum to help us each other. Our aim is the same for all of us:to get a working device. Please take it always in mind. The rest is secondary. Do not start having a row for a different point of view.Bajac, we need your unvaluable help and expertise.

As for myself, as you know, I dont have deep knowledge of electricity, but my task here is to spread what it is written in the original spanish patents, to keep this forum alive and to show details to make you think about possibilities. Bajac, I trust your technical report, but I am just discussing some points which are not well defined as the orientation. I am just trying to help, it is good to have different options in case the first attemp fail. I hope to see you around here tomorow. ;), and I agree that we may skip the use of a rotary conmutator.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 23, 2013, 04:46:48 PM

snip

The above questions are for brainstorming, only. You do not need to reply because I will not waste more time on this issue.

It looks like you did not understand what I was referring to when I said "replicate Figuera's apparatus".


Bajac



Hi Bajac,


Now the one problem I have with your suggestion is... what to replicate?


You see I build things from a standard drawing which has a plan view, a front view and a side view. The patent drawings are only schematics and convey no useful information. What did the device look like?
How big is it? what shape are the cores? how many turns of what size wire? Then it is said that the coils are at 90 degrees in the 1902 patent but not in the 1908 patent? Then in the latest patent there is a 'bar; show across the three coils... so much confusion and no answers???


Regards,


Ron


"Schematic": schematic diagram represents the elements of a system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System) using abstract, graphic symbols (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol) rather than realistic pictures. A schematic usually omits all details that are not relevant to the information the schematic is intended to convey,
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 23, 2013, 05:13:15 PM
Greetings everyone,

I have lurked on this forum on and off for a couple of years and this is the project I seriously believe will work and is within my ability to build. My goal is to build a self running 12VDC high amperage generator to feed a high output inverter to 120VAC.

After studying the 1908 patent and sketches and modeling the commutator on a CAD I understand how it works with one contact brush (+ voltage) and the resistor. It is not complicated at all. The picture of the commutator in the Buforn patent in post #216 by hanon is correct. The commutator ring with the 16 contacts is attached to the resistor taps in 8 places on the upper side of the ring. Those 8 upper contact points are jumped to the lower 8 contact points in the lower half of the ring as shown in the upper left corner of the Buforn drawing. The brush must always be in contact with two adjacent commutator contacts at all times as it rotates around the commutator. If you have ever taken apart an old fashioned automobile generator, just picture the commutator with one wide brush riding on it.

My build is going use the commutator and an old fashioned wound resistor. These may have to be fabricated and may take a while.  My thinking is the methods available in 1908 should be used. Presently I think a small DC motor will be used to rotate the brush. The motor and the supply voltage to the inducing coils will be powered by separate windings in the induced coils after starting.

May I ask a favor? Can anyone point me to information about building or winding high amp DC coils? Maybe in the 10 amp range or higher?

Best Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2013, 06:15:09 PM
i_ron,
Your are 100% correct! A patent is just a concept, an abstract!! You can implement it by trial and error or by using some engineering expertise.
I will post (in about two weeks) some sketches and information of what I am doing with the corrections based on my experience with this device. It might help you and others.
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 23, 2013, 10:46:51 PM
Again : is there anything in patent text about box around the connection point from the commutator to power supply , I spotted ?
Maybe there is a better , bigger  picture of the method of connection here ?


Why ? You should easily guess.... ::)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 24, 2013, 12:58:13 AM
i_ron,
Your are 100% correct! A patent is just a concept, an abstract!! You can implement it by trial and error or by using some engineering expertise.
I will post (in about two weeks) some sketches and information of what I am doing with the corrections based on my experience with this device. It might help you and others.
Bajac


That will be great Bajac, I look forward to that.


Thanks, Ron

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 24, 2013, 09:27:55 PM
Again : is there anything in patent text about box around the connection point from the commutator to power supply , I spotted ?
Maybe there is a better , bigger  picture of the method of connection here ?


Why ? You should easily guess.... ::)

The connection box has intiged me since I saw it. I domt know what represents and there is no further explanation in the text. It is only mentioned that the current after doing its task in the electromagnets returns to the origin where it was taken..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 24, 2013, 10:29:45 PM
The connection box has intiged me since I saw it. I domt know what represents and there is no further explanation in the text. It is only mentioned that the current after doing its task in the electromagnets returns to the origin where it was taken..




you see... origin ? not power supply ???  ::)

better give us the complete translation
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 25, 2013, 01:13:42 AM
Hi all,

In Reply #199 it was mentioned about 3 phase line reactors on ebay. I just purchased 10 of the transformers for a total price of $173.23. Expensive, but I hope they will work. I should recieve them by 29 Aug 13.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 25, 2013, 01:40:53 AM
I also bought 10 line reactors of about 3/4HP. I am still waiting for them. Something to keep in mind is that the line reactors are designed for 3% impedance only. Which means that there are not too many turns in the coils. I had recommended about 300 to 400 turns for the N and S coils. The wire gauge of these electromagnets can be AWG#18. The "y" electromagnets shall not be less than 200 turns and no smaller than AWG#14.


You need to be careful when cutting the iron core. The laminated core should be pressed or sandwiched between two pieces of stiff material to avoid damaging the steel sheets.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 25, 2013, 02:13:21 AM
bajac,
The ones I bought were RL-00201 reactors, 600V 2Amp. I thought they might need to be rewired, but did not know wire size and turns. Thank you for the information.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on August 25, 2013, 02:52:40 AM
Hi Ron,

long no see here. How are you ?

Many things are not clear in this patent/concept:

1) are the N-S-cores one U-shaped core or two cores with an airgap at the bottom
2) how long are the output-coils ?  For me this is the most important question because taking into accout the
    shape of the primary voltage  ( see attachment ) at S and N  then my estimation is that at each moment
    during on cycle the overall magnetic flux across the long secondary coil does not change...but the magnetic
    field-density-distribution along secondary-coil is changing at each step. This then means that - if we assume
    a core-material  exists in the secondary coil - that the inductivity at each end of the secondary coil is
    different ( I know it sounds strange ) ... but with one  exeption: if current is equal in both primary coil
   ( midth of the cycle )

So if I visualize the process during on cycle the magnetic field density at at both ends of the secondary might behave like a standing wave ( reflecitve) ...if one side is decreasing the other side is increasing.
In other words we have a local change of magnetic field-desity without an overall change of the inductivity..
a change without Lenz.

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 25, 2013, 05:42:51 PM
Hi Ron,

long no see here. How are you ?

Many things are not clear in this patent/concept:

1) are the N-S-cores one U-shaped core or two cores with an airgap at the bottom
2) how long are the output-coils ?  For me this is the most important question because taking into accout the
    shape of the primary voltage  ( see attachment ) at S and N  then my estimation is that at each moment
    during on cycle the overall magnetic flux across the long secondary coil does not change...but the magnetic
    field-density-distribution along secondary-coil is changing at each step. This then means that - if we assume
    a core-material  exists in the secondary coil - that the inductivity at each end of the secondary coil is
    different ( I know it sounds strange ) ... but with one  exeption: if current is equal in both primary coil
   ( midth of the cycle )

So if I visualize the process during on cycle the magnetic field density at at both ends of the secondary might behave like a standing wave ( reflecitve) ...if one side is decreasing the other side is increasing.
In other words we have a local change of magnetic field-desity without an overall change of the inductivity..
a change without Lenz.

Regards

Kator01


Thanks Kator, I am doing fine, two projects on the go beside this...


But yes, that makes sense, trying to follow this so every bit helps!


What I need is to see (or understand) a working model of the principle...


B R,


Ron
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 26, 2013, 04:58:22 PM
Quote
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus
 

I may have discovered the meaning of this!

Using the rotating commutator and tapped resistor from the 1908 patent, if you graph the voltage change of the N S solenoids as the brush rotates through 360 degrees the voltage waves are flattened at the extreme difference of voltages. The volts remain at the maximum for one set of coils and minimum for the other set of coils for close to 70 degrees of rotation, at 0 degrees and 180 degrees. Then the voltage bias begins to switch to the opposite coils. In other words the magnetic bias moves back and forth like a pendulum, pausing at the end of each stroke before reversing. The exact amount of 'dwell' would depend on commutator design and brush width.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 26, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Where is the return to the origin in the drawing http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/126632/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/126632/)  from page 15? Or the starting power supply conection?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 26, 2013, 05:58:23 PM
Thinking some more, I wonder if magnetic spin is involved.

The molecules of the core(s) become aligned N-S, or S-N when magnetized. Molecules have mass, thus inertia. If the NS inducing coils are oriented with like poles to each other, as the field strength transfers from one set of coils to the other, the molecules in the induced core would flip N for S. then S for N, repeatedly.  Wouldn't they? Having mass and inertia I think they would continue in the same direction of 'spin', thus each molecule would become a tiny spinning magnetic field, spinning faster and faster as the inducing field strengths move back and forth at a greater rate. Bruce_TPU on his TPU thread keeps emphasizing “counter rotating magnetic fields” as a key to power.

Something to think about.

@Doug1
The return to origin and the starting power supply would be the square box (battery / power source) just above the signature.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 27, 2013, 04:16:31 AM
A few questions about coils/electromagnets.

When several coils are connected in series, does the voltage add together?, does the amperage add together?, does it multipy?

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 27, 2013, 09:56:53 PM
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.

"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 29, 2013, 04:34:21 PM
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.

"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"

Bob


Hi Bob,


Yes that is almost the case, voltage adds and amps stays the same... except it will be less than one coil as the more coils in series the more resistance, so voltage and amps will need to be adjusted accordingly.


Ron
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 29, 2013, 05:14:13 PM
Thank you for the info Ron.

I recieved 4 of the 3 phase line reactors, and should recieve the other 6 today. ( see Reply# 232 and Reply#234 ). I am going to try using just one for now and reverse one outside coil to get a N-S allignment. I am not going to rewire them until after I have tried them to see if they will work. If they work, I am considering placing all 10 sets ( instead of just 7 sets ) to get a greater output. My main problem will be that I do not have an O-scope, so I will have to find someone with one to run test for me. Hopefully I will have some results by next week.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 29, 2013, 11:21:28 PM
Maybe the reason for being a Lenzless generator is simply because both changes in the inducer currents are in opposition. The back emf is a consecuence of the change in the magnetic field, and is calculated by the equation back_emf = -N·S·dB/dt .
 
 Because the current in the N electromagnets is increasing while the current in the S electromagnets is decreasing we can say that their time derivatives are opposite :  dIN/dt = - dIS/dt
 
 As the inducer field is calculated as B = (nu·N·I)/length , therefore deriving:  dB/dt = (nu·N/length) · dI/dt . For this reason , with opposite changes in both inducer currents, the change in both induced magnetic fields are  in opposition: dBN/dt = - dBS/dt
 
 If both values can be added (I am not sure (please comment..)) dBfinal/dt = dBN/dt + dBS/dt = 0  . Thus, althought there is a change in the primary magnetic fields (the cause of the induced current), the resulting induced magnetic field (the consecuence) -moving back to the electromagnets- is almost eliminated.
 
 Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 29, 2013, 11:51:38 PM
Hannon
 You will also have to add to the calculation how much effect  one set of electromagnets helps to collaps the other set or pushes the feild in the other direction as the one set is powering up the other is powering down not just to a state of off but being pushed by the other harder then it would fall by itself. The back emf will be aided by the forward emf of the other.
Title: Two unphased signals
Post by: hanon on August 30, 2013, 06:24:35 PM
Hi all,
 
In the attached Excel file there is a calculation to obtain the two 90º unphased signals required in the 1908 patent. The method is very simple, and is summarized as follows:
 
            1- From a AC signal apply a full wave rectification to convert it into two always positive waves. ( By using a center tapped rectifier you can obtain two series of signals: one coming from the positive half waves of the AC signal, and the other signal from the negative half waves of the initial AC signal ). Also you can create both series using a PWM, taking a derivation of its output to a NOT gate, and then two transistors to create two independient square signals.
 
            2- Apply a RL filter or a RC filter. This filter will smooth and will create a lag in order that both series of signals will be delayed and, thus, superimposing themselves. This way you can obtain the two unphased signals.
 
The RL filtering of RC filtering is defined by the value of L/R or R·C in each case. Choosing a proper value you can get the required result. All the info is included into the Excel file. I have included both possibilities because I don´t know if you can use a RC filter with high amperages, or if the output intensity will rever its direction in an RC circuit. Please comment.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 01, 2013, 02:58:39 PM
 Its obvious no one has figured this out yet or come up suporting evidence in a working operational theory. I think the patent was skillfully executed. 
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on September 02, 2013, 08:28:34 AM
Hi all, Bob here with a thought or 2?
 
IMHO,

In PJ Kelley's newest ebook V24.01 R. Date 14 AUG 13, pg 175, next to the bottom of the page,

"Señor Figueras has constructed a rough apparatus
by which, in spite of it’s small size and it’s defects, he obtains 550 volts, which he utilises in his own house for
lighting purposes and for driving a 20 horse-power motor."

1. 1 HP = 746 wats, 20hp = 14,920W, + lights (lets say 80W), TOTAL=15,000 Watts

2. 15,000 Watts/ 550 Volts = 27.27 AMPS (lot of Amps) Maybe multi stage trans. to get it to useful?

3. 7 sets would be 27.27 Amps each with a Voltage of approx. 78.6 Volts

4. So if there were 27.27 AMPS in each set, and each set had 78.6 Volts, with 7 sets there would be:: 15,004 WATTS.

5. If there were 10 sets, each would have 27.27 AMPS and about 78.6 VOLTS, with 10 sets there would be 21,432 WATTS.

Comments welcome and needed as alsways

Bob

(It's funny what my little brain thinks of when I have a drink or two! LOL)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on September 02, 2013, 08:45:00 AM
Hi all again,

I think I might need another drink or three to get this straight.  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on September 02, 2013, 09:12:50 AM
Hi All,

Bob again,

looking at the only diagrams available, do you think pnp and npn transistors will help? limited v/a?

I think with another drink, that "origin" on the "-" side might mean total ground-put a ground rod in the ground, preferably deep. gather E energy! So?

Any questions I will not be qualified to answer because
I need another drink!!!! yea!

My tempory disability( dog tried to kill me) is slowing me down some!
But I Love this fun!

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 02, 2013, 09:53:12 AM
Hi RMatt,

The quote that you refers about Figuera generator is dated in 1902 ( 20 HP and 550 V), so it was obtained with his 1902 generator (which didn´t ahve 7 stages but a different arrangement. In the 1902 patent is written that he only shows a group of four stages but more stages could be used for increasing the output). All the newspaper references that we have are from 1902, later, after selling the patent there are no more references, and his 1908 was filed just before dying so no more reference in the newspapers.

About the NPN transistors in Kelly´s diagram I think there won´t be any limitation V/A because they are for the inducer current which is supposed to be small.  Instead of using a cascade of the 2N3055 + 2N2222 to create a Darlington you could use a BDX53 which is directly a Darlington (so it is simpler to be welded)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 02, 2013, 04:35:59 PM
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.
  If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 03, 2013, 03:28:37 AM
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.
  If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.
 
I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand  it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out  a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 03, 2013, 11:21:52 AM
I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand  it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out  a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.
Hi a.king21,
Could you explain better how can energy be extracted from an oscillating bloch wall? Is there any link or reference to this subject?

What it is true is that Figuera stated that the distance between the two inducer external coils should be very small. And this statement is related with some kind of effect that he was trying to capture. Is it needed to wind each external coil in clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW) directions?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 03, 2013, 03:15:51 PM
Hi a.king21,
Could you explain better how can energy be extracted from an oscillating bloch wall? Is there any link or reference to this subject?

What it is true is that Figuera stated that the distance between the two inducer external coils should be very small. And this statement is related with some kind of effect that he was trying to capture. Is it needed to wind each external coil in clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW) directions?


http://servv89pn0aj.sn.sourcedns.com/~gbpprorg/mil/mindcontrol/Richard_Clark_Letters_Compilation_Vol1-3.pdf


About half way in the pdf Richard Lefors Clark explains the gating of the Bloch wall.


I would treat N ans S as one continuous coil - so the windings are in the same direction. The Bloch wall arises naturally.
What Figuera appears to have done is to oscillate the Bloch wall with this simple design.
That's why he clearly pictures the y coil as much smaller than the two control coils.
If the y coil is much  bigger than the Bloch wall then Lenz kicks in and ou is gone.
You can get one coil from each dead CFL . The core is however ferite and may need to be changed.
I've had this on my "to do" list for a long time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 09, 2013, 07:46:25 PM

What Figuera appears to have done is to oscillate the Bloch wall with this simple design.
That's why he clearly pictures the y coil as much smaller than the two control coils.


It is true that Figuera stated in his 1902 patent that the separation between the poles of the electromagnets must be very small. In 1908 Figuera wrote: "Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small)" I have always been intriged why he called line "y" and not coil "y".

Anyway, I have been collecting some material about magnetism discoveries by Howard Johnson and, Roy Davis & Rawls. Maybe you are interested in the next video. It is -at least- surprising:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWOKefrcpAg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWOKefrcpAg)

I know that there is more into magnetism that the current concepts accepted by mainstream science.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 09, 2013, 11:52:14 PM
Hi all,

Apart from the 1908 Figuera patent there is another Figuera patent (No. 30378 dated in 1902) about a motionless electrical generator: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) This device is even simpler to replicate. Figuera appeared in the newspapers in 1902 when he was using this generator to produce 20 HP. Therefore we know that he also got high energy gains. Later, Figuera changed his design after selling this patent to a banker union.

 A deep study about this patent was also done by user Bajac. You can find his technical study in the next link, which is really worthwhile to read it:

http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/)

As a conclusion: "BECAUSE THE INTERIOR WINDINGS (b) ARE TOTALLY ENCLOSED BY THE INDUCED WIDING (c) THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD WILL ENTER AND LEAVE THE TURNS OF THE INTERIOR WINDING (b) INDUCING A ZERO NET VOLTAGE, WHICH RESULTS IN A CANCELLATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THE LENZ’S LAW. IN OTHER WORDS, THE LOAD CURRENT FLOWING IN THE c-WINDING IS NOT REFLECTED BACK TO THE b-WINDING."

Note: The induced winding is denoted by (c) while the inducer electromagnets are (a) and (b)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 11, 2013, 01:53:58 AM
Regarding the methods to minimize the effect of Lenz's law, one can see that Figuera used two method: the method of in the 1902 patent and the method in the 1908 patent. If you draw the magnetic flowpath in the 1902 generator, it can be noted that the flow of the induced coil (external) enters and leaves the inducer coil (internal). Because the inducer coil is symmetrically placed at 90 degrees inside the induced, the flow from the induced coil will enter and leave the inducer coil. If the flow enters and leaves the coil no voltage will be induced in it. Notice that it is not enough to placed those coils at 90 degrees but also there must be symmetry. This is because if there is no symmetry the balance of magnetic flux entering is not necessarily equal to the magnetic flux coming out.

The method of 1908 is different. While one coil induces another coil deviates the induced magnetic flux so that this flux does not oppose to the coil which is inducing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 14, 2013, 03:26:59 PM
How deep is the rabbit hole Alice? Oh ,it's about yay deep ends about at the spot where you cant go any farther.lol
  In the interest of statements used one could consider what is the patent for and what is it not for. Things that already are in play are not new. Seperate them out and learn what is not new. To better understand what is.
 close'st comparable. There seems to be many, patent 3913004 "Method and apparatus to increase electral power" Built on a standard generator frame fairly straight forward good nuggets. But is that one BS umm have to check the citations 3078409 "Electrical power converter" GM owned aviation use.2640181 "Dynomo electric machine " signed to Bendix aviation.Who know they had a aviation division ,Ithought they just worked with braking systems.3223916 "Brushless Rotary inverter" signed to TRW inc a big gov contractor with lots of little gubby fingers in lots of pies.Like a daycare center on crack. Now while I like to ponder how all these big wigs never stumbled on the idea to just make thier toys not turn I have to remind myself with whom they like to sleep with.Who stands to lose the most money.Not just the money today but all the money for all time. Figura figured out why have it turn at all.Others figured how to stay in business and still get the benifits of better engineering. You can learn a lot if you keep plugging along.The method is what is important not the exact toys. The same applied to weapon like a gun would yeid a zero recoil gun where all the forces both forard and recoil are directed to forward only motion or force forward.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 17, 2013, 12:25:28 AM
Hi all,
 
 I have done some testing with a similar winding to the one posted for the 1902 patent No. 30378. As you can see I did not get any output result ( 0 volts) . The output I got with irregular (manual) pulses were a measurement error dued to the voltmeter. But with AC (and also tested with intermittent DC current) I did get 0 volts. I first tested with two identical coils and later I tested with different coils (internal coil:150 turns, copper wire of 0.4 mm diameter; external coil: 900 turns, copper wire 0.4 mm diameter)
 
 Video 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPKIfTUhWgo)
 
 Video 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syUWEQQiAkY)
 
 I think that in this case the equation of the  induction over a wire of length "l" has to be applied. Changing the magnetic field over a static wire is the same as having a static B-field and move the wire closer and farer from the electromagnet sequentialy. In this case we can not apply the Faraday Law for the induction over a coil perpendicular to the B-field but the equation of the induction of a moving wire at speed "v":
 
 E = l·B·v·sin (alpha) , being alpha the angle between the B-field and the velocity v
 
 In the  case of patent 30378 (motionless generator)  the wire under a oscilatory B-field can be assimilated to move the wire in parallel to a static B-field so the angle  is sin(alpha) = sin (0º) = 0, and then the induced voltage is null. In case of the patent 30376 (where the winding is wound around a drum which rotates around some electromagnets in the center) the wire is moving at right angle of the B-field, so sin(alpha) = sin(90º) = 1 . Therefore I think that this winding proposal is fine for this patent with the moving coil (patent 30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)), but it won´t work for the motionless generator (patent 30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf)).
 
 In 1902 Figuera patented two different devices but maybe he just built one of them. I don´t know if he built both or he just built one and the other was a theoretical proposal. In the 1902 newspaper clippings is written that the Figuera device "consisted of a generator, a motor and a kind of governor or regulator". This description matches much better with the requirements for the the implementention of patent 30376 where a motor is needed to rotate the moving coil.
 
 One detail about patent 30378: reading the text it seems to indicate that all the electromagnets are conected to the same inducer signal. But reading carefully: " this generator whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that, in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, ..." Why did Figuera  remark that it was arranged in two sets of electromagnets? ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 18, 2013, 09:05:40 PM
I am planning to replicate the Figuera device. As I am not that great on electronics, I am planning to build a mechanical switching device. I have a metal working skills and equipment. One question I have is, how many turns of wire are recommended for each primary and secondary windings? Online there in one builder using 150 turns on the primary's and 300 on the center secondary.
Thanks to all,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 19, 2013, 07:56:15 PM
Shadow
It seems that everyone may have given up on the stationary device. I have planned to make the commentator on my switching device able to either bridge two contacts (spark less) or not. I reasoned that since most all of Tesla's devices use a spark, maybe Clemente was trying to somehow conceal the way the way his machine really worked. Also, one experimenter got a better response when every time he manually touched the wire to complete the circuit. Anyway, I could still use a sparking device in other experiments!

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 19, 2013, 08:19:34 PM
Hi all,

Shadow, wellcome to the forum!! I think Bajac sometime ago posted the proper number of turns for these coils. Search it into Bajac´s posts from some weeks (or months) ago.

Another subject: I posted a winding for the patent 30376, the one with the rotating coil but with static core, I made a mistake in the poles. Now I have calculated fine and with the rotation of the wire the intensity generated in both sides adds up.  (I don´t know how to edit my previous post. If someone knows please tell me how to do it)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 19, 2013, 09:04:22 PM
Hello everybody
I am testing the "concept" of the 1908 patent
As the commutator I am using one from an AC motor 10 poles
attached some pics, may be useful for replicators
Cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 19, 2013, 09:14:50 PM
Alvaro: Nice build, looking forward to test results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 19, 2013, 09:58:50 PM
Hello everybody
I am testing the "concept" of the 1908 patent
As the commutator I am using one from an AC motor 10 poles
attached some pics, may be useful for replicators
Cheers
Alvaro


Good job man.
I'm looking forward for the results. I start to build the electromechanic control system. Probably one more week I will be able to test.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 19, 2013, 10:59:19 PM
a.king21
thank you
I had to stop the tests because of problems with the VRs, may be they went toasted as no way to regulate them.
I made the first attempts with a 12V 200 mA power supply (batteries behave there own way)
With this setup lots of sparks, Volts in the hundreds and much RF emission, I realized that with just one multimeter probe  on a cap at the output it reads crazy voltages.
The output may drive a small dc motor (inductive load) but does goes down with resistive, as a 12V incandescent lamp.
At higher rpm in commutator, better output, and lower amps at input.
Before doing more accurate measurements (systematic) I´ve got to change the resistors an put some for 1W or so.
I don.t like to post results with claims, as for reliable measurements, is essential to use professional equipment AND knowledge which I do not have.

cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 19, 2013, 11:36:06 PM
Hi Alvaro,

Very ingenious device!!!  I would recommend you to use much much lower resistors. If you are feeding 12V with just one resistor ( 100 Kohm as you are using) --> I = V/R =12/100000 = 0.00012 A as maximun ( with 1 resistor). I think you should use resistor lower than 5 ohms (or less) to have greater intensities. I posted an Excel simulation where you can see a good value for your resistors. Buy resistors prepared to evacuate some heat (10 W or more ). Also you may use a more powerful DC source. My DC source is from and old scanner (12 V and 1.2 A)

Good luck!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2013, 03:49:49 AM
Hi all,

I have to say that I am very happy to see the enthusiasm and effort shown by the members of this forum about Figuera's devices. Figuera's technology is free and it is here for the taking.

First of all, I apologize for not being able to provide the detailed description in a single document of the device that I am building. I have been really busy with other affairs that do not allow to spend time on this project. However, all information about Figuera's technology has been disclosed in this thread.

The main components are the iron cores and the windings. For example, the key components of the 1908 device are the electromagnets. Once you build the electromagnets, you only need two 90-degree shifted full wave rectified voltages. It does not matter how these input voltages are generated! If you do not know how to build the electronic circuits, you can use the commutated switch and the power resistors shown in the original patent. For the size of the device shown in this thread, it is recommended that the power resistors have a minimum rating of 50W and a maximum of 10 ohms. THESE RESISTORS GET REALLY HOT! That is why Figuera showed wire wound resistor type. When Figuera ran his tests, I can imaging these resistors getting red hot similar to wired heaters. The use of these resistors is the least efficient option. The resistors dissipate relatively high energy.

A better option for generating the input voltages mentioned above is to use a motor-generator. The generator should be able to provide two sinusoidal voltages shifted 90 degrees. Then, each of these generator AC voltages can be applied two a full-wave rectifier diodes.

If the iron core is big enough to house the coils, you can use about any iron core that you feel comfortable working with. The cross section of the iron core that I used is about 1 inch width and 3/4" depth.

I have also recommended to build the 'N' and 'S' electromagnets with no less than 300 turns with taps, let's say 200T, 300T, and so on. If you can do 400T, it is even better. The minimum gauge size for these primaries coils should be #18 AWG.

I also recommended that the wire of 'y' secondary coils should have a minimum gauge of #14 AWG. Minimum number of turns should be 200T. The use of #14 AWG wire for the secondary will allow for the connections of heavier loads.

The other important design criterion to keep in mind is to minimize the air gaps. If you refer to the photos I posted a while ago, you will notice that the air gaps consist of a paper thin insulator.

The above recommendations are based on my own experience with this device. If you follow them, you will have a device with good power output during testing.

With respect to the 1902 patent, the primary coils should have a lot of turns. For testing purposes, I would use no less than 500 turns of #20 or #22 AWG for each of the primary coils 'a' and 'b'. Because the secondary must travel through the air gaps, the air gaps shown in the 1902 patent are considerably larger than the air gaps of the 1902 patent, and therefore, the magnetic reluctance of the of the iron core is much higher for the 1902 device. The latter implies that to create a considerable magnetic flux in the 1902 device, you will need a very high A-T (Ampere-Turns). And, that is why Mr. Figuera furnished the air gaps of the 1902 device with primary coils ‘a’ and ‘b’ located on both sides of the air gaps.

Thanks again.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 04:31:58 AM
Hi all,

I have to say that I am very happy to see the enthusiasm and effort shown by the members of this forum about Figuera's devices. Figuera's technology is free and it is here for the taking.

First of all, I apologize for not being able to provide the detailed description in a single document of the device that I am building. I have been really busy with other affairs that do not allow to spend time on this project. However, all information about Figuera's technology has been disclosed in this thread.

The main components are the iron cores and the windings. For example, the key components of the 1908 device are the electromagnets. Once you build the electromagnets, you only need two 90-degree shifted full wave rectified voltages. It does not matter how these input voltages are generated! If you do not know how to build the electronic circuits, you can use the commutated switch and the power resistors shown in the original patent. For the size of the device shown in this thread, it is recommended that the power resistors have a minimum rating of 50W and a maximum of 10 ohms. THESE RESISTORS GET REALLY HOT! That is why Figuera showed wire wound resistor type. When Figuera ran his tests, I can imaging these resistors getting red hot similar to wired heaters. The use of these resistors is the least efficient option. The resistors dissipate relatively high energy.

A better option for generating the input voltages mentioned above is to use a motor-generator. The generator should be able to provide two sinusoidal voltages shifted 90 degrees. Then, each of these generator AC voltages can be applied two a full-wave rectifier diodes.

If the iron core is big enough to house the coils, you can use about any iron core that you feel comfortable working with. The cross section of the iron core that I used is about 1 inch width and 3/4" depth.

I have also recommended to build the 'N' and 'S' electromagnets with no less than 300 turns with a taps, let's say 200T, 300T, and so on. If you can do 400T, it is even better. The minimum gauge size for these primaries coils should be #18 AWG.

I also recommended that the wire of 'y' secondary coils should have a minimum gauge of #14 AWG. Minimum number of turns should be 200T. The use of #14 AWG wire for the secondary will allow for the connections of heavier loads.

The other important design criterion to keep in mind is to minimize the air gaps. If you refer to the photos I posted a while ago, you will notice that the air gaps consist of a paper thin insulator.

The above recommendations are based on my own experience with this device. If you follow them, you will have a device with good power output during testing.

With respect to the 1902 patent, the primary coils should have a lot of turns. For testing purposes, I would use no less than 500 turns of #20 or #22 AWG for each of the primary coils 'a' and 'b'. Because the secondary must travel through the air gaps, the air gaps shown in the 1902 patent are considerably larger than the air gaps of the 1902 patent, and therefore, the magnetic reluctance of the of the iron core is much higher for the 1902 device. The latter implies that to create a considerable magnetic flux in the 1902 device, you will need a very high A-T (Ampere-Turns). And, that is why Mr. Figuera furnished the air gaps of the 1902 device with primary coils ‘a’ and ‘b’ located on both sides of the air gaps.

Thanks again.
Bajac
Sorry if I didn't do my homework, but I have some questions: the iron core: is it laminated? When you say " 2 times 90 degrees voltage" what exactly you mean? I' m building one oscilator using the patent principle. This device will generate a complete ac sequence.
Thanks e sorry about the dumb questions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2013, 01:54:55 PM
ariovaldo,
Based on your questions, I have to assumed that you have not read the paper that originated this thread explaining the operations of the 1908 and 1902 devices. For the 1908 device, please, use the latest revision posted on this thread. I highly recommend you to read these papers and whatever was posted in this thread before building your device. There are a lot of usefull information.
My understanding is that oscillators devices are usually used for signal (very low power) applications. The input power for the Figuera's devices is relatively high. For instance, the 1908 device that I built using the power resistors required an input power of about 60 Watts. When I tested it without the resistors, the input power was about 15W. And, I am referring to the device with one set of coils only (not seven as shown in the 1908 patent) for which I posted few photos. Therefore, you need to make sure that whatever oscillator you are using is capable of handling that kind of power.
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 02:17:30 PM
Some pictures from the electromechanic "inverter" that I'm building to test the patent.
The most difficult part will be the transformer.
Later on I will post the schematic and the resistors values that I will use to test this in one 3 phases 25 kVA transformer.
I'm not expecting any "OU". I want to learn and understand the circuit behavior ( I will take some scope shots)


Cheers


Ari



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 02:24:06 PM
ariovaldo,
Based on your questions, I have to assumed that you have not read the paper that originated this thread explaining the operations of the 1908 and 1902 devices. For the 1908 device, please, use the latest revision posted on this thread. I highly recommend you to read these papers and whatever was posted in this thread before building your device. There are a lot of usefull information.
My understanding is that oscillators devices are usually used for signal (very low power) applications. The input power for the Figuera's devices is relatively high. For instance, the 1908 device that I built using the power resistors required an input power of about 60 Watts. When I tested it without the resistors, the input power was about 15W. And, I am referring to the device with one set of coils only (not seven as shown in the 1908 patent) for which I posted few photos. Therefore, you need to make sure that whatever oscillator you are using is capable of handling that kind of power.
Thanks,
Bajac


Thanks.
The oscillator will be able to hand the power. The resistors will have the following values



Ohms     Volts
8       =  1
6.6    =  3.6
3.3    =  7.2
2.2    = 10.8
1.65  =14.4
1.32  = 18
1.1    = 21.6
0       = 24



What do You think?



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2013, 06:27:56 PM
Ariovaldo,
WOW! That is not an oscillator but a heavy duty commutated switch. You got some skills!
I wanted to ask you, how did you get the values shown on the voltage column?
Going back to the iron core application, Mr. Figuera stated in his 1908 patent that it can be of a low quality soft iron type. He also stated that a solid piece (not laminated) of iron can be used. His statement can be justified by the use of air gaps in the device. Because the air gaps have much higher reluctance than any low quality iron core, there is no noticeable difference in performance when using, whether high quality laminated Silicone steel sheets or low cost soft iron bars.
Thanks,
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 20, 2013, 07:09:43 PM
hanon:
thanks, I apologize, my PS is from a wifi modem, rated at 12V-1.2A the figure I posted (200mA) is a measure at the input, loaded.
I also tested with a resistor made with the metallic spiral of a hair dryer, min.3 ohm, and so on.
Bajac is right, is should be the most inefficient atempt as it got very hot, which means loses all over !!
In the other hand, I don´t know how to pulse the inductor not having Mr Lenz at the collapse, as the idea of this patent is based in a variable DC current, not falling anytime to 0 volts.

Anyway the learning process keeps on going !

Ariovaldo if just the commutator is that size, I imagine you want to power your own car factory no ? ;D ;D

regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 07:37:52 PM
Ariovaldo,
WOW! That is not an oscillator but a heavy duty commutated switch. You got some skills!
I wanted to ask you, how did you get the values shown on the voltage column?
Going back to the iron core application, Mr. Figuera stated in his 1908 patent that it can be of a low quality soft iron type. He also stated that a solid piece (not laminated) of iron can be used. His statement can be justified by the use of air gaps in the device. Because the air gaps have much higher reluctance than any low quality iron core, there is no noticeable difference in performance when using, whether high quality laminated Silicone steel sheets or low cost soft iron bars.
Thanks,
Bajac
My first intention with this device is to do a trial using a 3 phase transformer that I have, using Gruamge schematics. Having the transformer in my hands, I simulated the voltage drop using 12 volts battery and nichcrome 16 gauge  wire.
Check out.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 10:58:32 PM
My first intention with this device is to do a trial using a 3 phase transformer that I have, using Gruamge schematics. Having the transformer in my hands, I simulated the voltage drop using 12 volts battery and nichcrome 16 gauge  wire.
Check out.


I just built the resistors. Next week probably I will test with the transformer connected.
This weekend I will finish the dc motor drive.


Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 11:59:32 PM
hanon:
thanks, I apologize, my PS is from a wifi modem, rated at 12V-1.2A the figure I posted (200mA) is a measure at the input, loaded.
I also tested with a resistor made with the metallic spiral of a hair dryer, min.3 ohm, and so on.
Bajac is right, is should be the most inefficient atempt as it got very hot, which means loses all over !!
In the other hand, I don´t know how to pulse the inductor not having Mr Lenz at the collapse, as the idea of this patent is based in a variable DC current, not falling anytime to 0 volts.

Anyway the learning process keeps on going !

Ariovaldo if just the commutator is that size, I imagine you want to power your own car factory no ? ;D ;D

regards
Alvaro
There you go my friend....
That is because you didn't see my Tesla coil... I was forbidden by the city to test it. I heard people saying: -"I don't know, but my sprinkler system start tor works funny, change the time for itself. ....


Ari
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 21, 2013, 11:06:02 PM
Ariovaldo,

I want to congratulate you for the effort you put on the construction details. You do a professional job!

I would not like you to be disappointed and discouraged from building the device, but it takes a lot of effort to work with such a large core, and then, not getting the results that you might expect.

I want to persuade you to get away from dealing with single large set of coils such as the 25KVA one shown in the photo. The success for building Figuera’s devices does not consist in making a single set of large electromagnets but connecting together multiple smaller sets of coils as shown in the 1908 patent. Even though the 1902 patent shows only a single set of coils, I truly believe that to get an operating voltage such as 120Vac, the secondary coils of several sets of the transformers (as shown in the patent) should be cascaded (or connected in series).

I have stated before that the design criteria for building the Figuera’s devices are different from the ones used for building today’s standard transformers. The most important feature of the Figuera’s 1902 and 1908 devices is the use of the air gaps. The definition of air gap is a discontinuity in the iron core path (note that I am not referring to the gaps of the windows occupied by the wire turns around the core). The air gaps are not allowed in the construction of standard transformers and these gaps change the rule of the game for the Figuera’s devices. The air gaps are the key feature to manipulate the induced magnetic fields (field of the secondary coils) in such a way as to make useless the typical current ratio formula of the standard transformers. Because the current of the secondary coils (load current) is not reflected back to the primary coils, the small power supplied to the primary coils is relatively constant even under large load currents. The implication of the above is that the iron core of a standard 1KVA transformer can generate more than 25KVA of power when used in the Figuera’s apparatus. Once the secondary voltage is established in the Figuera’s devices, the main limiting factor of the output power is the amount of current that the secondary wire can handle. That is the reason why the Figuera’s apparatus is known as his INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE.

The above sounds like a heresy but it is true! Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can generate large quantities of magnetic flux lines, which can force the core to reach magnetic saturation easily. As a matter of fact, the standard transformers are designed to work at the knee of the saturation curve where they are more efficient. That is the reason why an iron core used to build a 1KVA unit cannot be used to construct a 25KVA standard transformer. Because in standard transformers the ampere-turns of the primary coil increases with the power demand of the load, the cross sectional area of the iron core must be increased accordingly for the 25KVA unit. Otherwise, the 1KVA iron core will just saturate beyond the knee of the saturation curve and the increase of the primary ampere-turns will not necessarily translate in an increase of the magnetic flux through said core.

On the contrary, the air gaps present in the Figuera’s devices make them to operate at the very low part of the magnetic saturation curve. It is very unlikely that a 1KVA iron core used in a standard transformer will saturate even under a 25KVA load. Because the load is not reflected back to the primary coils, the ampere-turns of the primary coils do not substantially increase and stay constant.

The following is my recommendation:

Use an iron core with relatively small cross section, say not larger than 2 inch square and with gap windows large enough to accommodate the coils. The material can be laminated Silicone sheets or solid soft iron. You must be careful interconnecting the core sections when using solid soft iron materials. Do not add extraneous material between the sections such as welding. All the air gaps must be kept to a minimum. For the 1908 device, use a paper thin material to join the core sections. For the 1902 device, the dimension of the air gaps should be just big enough to fit the secondary turns. Because the air gaps of the 1902 device are larger than the gaps of the 1908 one, the primary coils of the 1902 device will require more turns.

Because of the air gaps, you will need a much higher ampere-turn for the primary coils just to create a small magnetic field. You can use wire gauges such as #18 or #20 AWG for building the primary coils. Even though I have recommended a minimum of 300 turns, do as many turns as you can for the first set. For example, if you can do 600 turns, incorporate middle taps for 300, 400, and 500 turns. For the secondary use no less than 200 turns of #14 AWG. Recall that you do not want to use a thin wire for the secondary because the power output for this device is limited by the gauge of the secondary coil. For the first set I would recommend to do no less than 350 turns for the secondary with middle taps at 200 and 300 turns. The flexibility of choosing primary and secondary taps when performing the testing will be invaluable.

Build and test one set of coils first! Once you know the coil taps that produces the best performance for the given core, you can proceed for the construction of the remaining sets. For example, if the test of the first set indicates that the best performance corresponds to taps that make the secondary coil generates 20Vac, then; you know that five more sets are needed to make a unit with a rating of 120Vac.
I hope the above description can guide you in the right direction.

Thanks and good luck!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 21, 2013, 11:40:14 PM
Ariovaldo,
I want to congratulate you for the effort you put on the construction details. You do a professional job!
I would not like you to be disappointed and discouraged from building the device, but it takes a lot of effort to work with such a large core, and then, not getting the results that you might expect.
I want to persuade you to get away from dealing with single large set of coils such as the 25KVA one shown in the photo. The success for building Figuera’s devices does not consist in making a single set of large electromagnets but connecting together multiple smaller sets of coils as shown in the 1908 patent. Even though the 1902 patent shows only a single set of coils, I truly believe that to get an operating voltage such as 120Vac, the secondary coils of several sets of the transformers shown in the patent should be cascaded (or connected in series).
I have stated before that the design criteria for building the Figuera’s devices are different from the ones used for building today’s standard transformers. The most important feature of the Figuera’s 1902 and 1908 devices is the use of the air gaps. The definition of air gap is a discontinuity in the iron core path (note that I am not referring to the gaps of the windows occupied by the wire turns around the core). The air gaps are not allowed in the construction of standard transformers and these gaps change the rule of the game for the Figuera’s devices. The air gaps are the key feature to manipulate the induced magnetic fields (field of the secondary coils) in such a way as to make useless the typical current ratio formula of the standard transformers. Because the current of the secondary coils (load current) is not reflected back to the primary coils, the small power supplied to the primary coils is relatively constant even under large load currents. The implication of the above is that the iron core of a standard 1KVA transformer can generate more than 25KVA of power when used in the Figuera’s apparatus. Once the secondary voltage is established in the Figuera’s devices, the main limiting factor of the output power is the amount of current that the secondary wire can handle. That is the reason why the Figuera’s apparatus is known as his INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE.
The above sounds like a heresy but it is true! Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can generate large magnetic flux lines, which can reach magnetic saturation easily. As a matter of fact, the standard transformers are designed to work at the knee of the saturation curve where they are more efficient. That is the reason why an iron core used to build a 1KVA unit cannot be used to construct a 25KVA standard transformer. Because in standard transformers the ampere-turns of the primary coil increases with the power demand of the load, the cross sectional area of the iron core must be increased accordingly for the 25KVA unit. Otherwise, the 1KVA iron core will just saturate beyond the knee of the saturation curve and the increase of the primary ampere-turns will not necessarily translate in an increase of the magnetic flux through said core.
On the contrary, the air gaps present in the Figuera’s devices make them to operate at the very low part of the magnetic saturation curve. It is very unlikely that even a 1KVA iron core used in a standard transformer will saturate even under a 25KVA load. Because the load is not reflected back to the primary coils, the ampere-turns of the primary coils do not substantially increase and stay constant.
The following is my recommendation:
Use an iron core with relatively small cross section, say not larger than 2 inch square and with gap windows large enough to accomodate the coils. The material can be laminated Silicone sheets or solid soft iron. You must be careful interconnecting the core sections when using solid soft iron materials. Do not add extraneous material between the sections such as welding. All the air gaps must be kept to a minimum. For the 1908 device, use a paper thin material to join the core sections. For the 1902 device, the dimension of the air gaps should be just big enough to fit the secondary turns. Because the air gaps of the 1902 device are larger than the gaps of the 1908 one, the primary coils of the 1902 device will require more turns.
Because of the air gaps, you will need a much higher ampere-turn for the primary coils just to create a small magnetic field. You can use wire gages such as #18 or #20 AWG for building the primary coils. Even though I have recommended a minimum of 300 turns, do as many turns as you can for the first set. For example, if you can do 600 turns, incorporate middle taps for 300, 400, and 500 turns. For the secondary use no less than 200 turns of #14 AWG. Recall that you do not want to use a thin wire for the secondary because the power output for this device is limited by the gauge of the secondary coil. For the first set I would recommend to do no less than 350 turns for the secondary with middle taps at 200 and 300 turns. The flexibility of choosing primary and secondary taps when performing the testing will be invaluable.
Build and test one set of coils first! Once you know the coil taps that produces the best performance for the given core, you can proceed for the construction of the remaining sets. For example, if the test of the first set indicates that the best performance corresponds to taps that make the secondary coil generates 20Vac, then; you know that five more sets are needed to make a unit with a rating of 120Vac.
I hope the above description can guide you in the right direction.
Thanks and good luck!
Bajac
Thank you Bajac.
To say the true, I started to build that for funny and now I' m thinking to go ahead and test the coils. I will use a solid steel core, since a laminate isn't so ease to find. There is a option to use old transformers but I will think about.
Yesterday  I watch a movie made by a friend of mine that was in Imperatriz,  Brazil in a fair. He saw the Barbosa device working. He said the device was all the time powering an air conditioner, a 20 hp motor and some lights. He didn't  see any secondary set of wires other than one to feed the system. The amplification factor was more than 10. Also, he said the one of 10 kVA, weigh not more tan 20 pounds. I think he is using a solid state version of Figueras device.
Thank for the tips and I will keeping posting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 23, 2013, 01:59:20 AM
I guess nonsense waste time and resources on rotary switches, best would be to invest in a good power inverter circuit where you could control multiple parameters of the input current of the magnetic assembly ...
I could see that the frequency and symmetry of the wave is very important, so being able to control these parameters is very important!
I still can not say I got over-unity, only managed an excellent system performance around + / - 85%, but I can get over-unity.
The idea is you build the magnet assembly and vary the parameters of the signal up to the point where things happen!
If you have a UPS or two PC sources in scrap, already has 80% of the circuit, get to work ...
In my tests I used (structural iron cores), ferrite (core old flay-back) and laminated iron transformer old ... and all work perfectly, but the working point changes depending on the type of core, adjusting the frequency and other parameters and everything goes back to normal ...
With four magnetic assemblies I got 2 light bulbs 12V 5W consuming 1.2A to the source (each lamp consumes about 0.55 A at 12V) ... no load I hit + / - 70V.

My sincere thanks to Bajac, Hanon and to everyone who made ​​it possible for these ideas!

Note 1: I chose to work with higher frequencies to be cheaper to make the coils and magnetic assemblies, but nothing prevents the circuit operate at low frequencies with higher voltages and currents, all depends on the power stage. If working with loads of 12V,,, use a voltage regulator to protect loads! then do not say you were not warned ...

Note 2: I used 4 schottky diodes full wave rectifier and filter 10.000uF/100V before the load ... and one single regulator 12V 3A!
Caution! not touch the wires after the power stage with the system on, the shock is big ... ;-)

Note 3: I apologize for not dominate the language, I will soon post more information pages with photos, diagrams and tests in my native language Overunity session in Brazil, not to depend more insane translator that ...
*********************************************
Acho besteira desperdiçar tempo e recursos em comutadores rotativos, melhor seria investir num bom circuito inversor de potência onde você poderia controlar vários parametros da corrente de entrada do conjunto magnético...
Eu pude notar que a frequência e a simetria da onda é muito importante, então poder controlar esses parametros é muito importante!
Eu ainda não posso dizer que consegui over-unity, só consegui um excelente rendimento do sistema em torno de +/- 85%, mas acho ser possível conseguir over-unity.
A ideia é você construir o conjunto magnético e variar os parametros do sinal até atingir o ponto onde as coisas acontecem!
Se você tem um no-break ou duas PC fontes na sucata, já tem 80% do circuito, mãos a obra...
Em meus testes usei (núcleos de ferro estrutural),,, ferrite ( núcleos velhos de flay-back) e ferro laminado de transformadores velhos... e todos funcionam perfeitamente, mas o ponto de trabalho muda dependendo do tipo de núcleo, ajuste a frequência e outros parâmetros e tudo volta ao normal...
Com 4 conjuntos magnéticos eu consegui acender 2 lâmpadas de 12V 5W   consumindo 1,2A da fonte ( cada lâmpada consome em torno de 0,55A em 12V)... sem carga eu atingi +/- 70V.

Meus sinceros agradecimentos a Bajac, Hanon e a todos que tornaram possível essas ideias!!!

Nota-1: eu optei por trabalhar com frequências mais altas por ser mais econômico fazer as bobinas e os conjuntos magnéticos, mas nada impede  que o circuito funcione em baixas frequências com tensões e correntes maiores, tudo depende da etapa de potência. Se for trabalhar com cargas de 12V,,, use um regulador de tensão para proteger as cargas! depois não diga que não avisei...

Nota 2: usei 4 diodos schottky retificador de onda completa e filtro de 10.000uF/100V antes da carga... e um regulador simples 12V 3A!
Cuidado! nao toque nos fios depois do estagio de potência com o sistema ligado, o choque é grande... ;-)

Nota 3: peço desculpas por não dominar o idioma, em breve irei postar mais infos com fotos , esquemas e testes em minha linguagem nativa em Overunity sessão Brasil, para não depender mais desse tradutor maluco...


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 23, 2013, 02:34:54 PM
Some more update about the rotary commutator device. I'm not worry if this system will work or not. To me this is more than " free energy". This is a therapy, a hobby.
About the transformer I will use some tips that Bajac gave me, trying different versions, using 6 and 12 set of 3 coils. After the test with the three phase transformer, I will change the resistors for the new set of coils.


Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 23, 2013, 03:11:11 PM
Ariovaldo: I like it!!
Re: Barbosa
I have some questions.
Do you know how long the devices were on?
How much was the load?
Was the device continuously plugged into the mains?


I do not say this lightly: I suspect that Barbosa is an investment fraud because 2 of the other patents are 1 Kapanadze and 2 Bedini's 1984 generator without the 110 degree make-break switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: john-g on September 23, 2013, 03:44:09 PM
Ariovaldo,

I want to congratulate you for the effort...

..... Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can ......

Bajac

It looks as though some excellent progress is being made here. You say that standard transformers do not have air-gaps, however normally they are built up of laminations.  Although these are primarly to stop eddy currents, do not the small gaps between the laninations, caused by the coating of varnish not add in small air-gap?

Kind regards

John

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 23, 2013, 11:51:47 PM

Hi all,
This is a post to correct some errors in the circuit that I posted in post #106 in the 15th of May. Please see the attached file with the correct circuit to implement two unphased signals as defined in the 1908 Figuera´s patent.
 
Regards

Hi all,

I have been testing the circuit disclosed in post #185 and previously in post #106 to create the two unphased signal required in the 1908 patent. I have found a mistake because pin No. 3 in the second CD4017 counter must not be used. Therefore this post correct post No. 185 and 106. I attach this file in pdf format and in jpg format.

Regards and good luck to all replicators!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 24, 2013, 12:09:30 AM
Ariovaldo,


I wanted to ask you about the air gaps. Are you providing air gaps to the iron core of the 25KVA transformer? If you do not provide the air gaps, there will be cross talking between the two primary coils. In other words, the magnetic filed of a primary coil will reach the other primary coil moving through the secondary coil completely, and as a result, there will no be induced voltage in the secondary coil.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 24, 2013, 03:07:06 AM
Ariovaldo,


I wanted to ask you about the air gaps. Are you providing air gaps to the iron core of the 25KVA transformer? If you do not provide the air gaps, there will be cross talking between the two primary coils. In other words, the magnetic filed of a primary coil will reach the other primary coil moving through the secondary coil completely, and as a result, there will no be induced voltage in the secondary coil.


Thanks,
Bajac
The 25 kva transformer is just to play. My intention is to build 6 small transformers with very smal air gap, to avoid the " normal" transformer  function...
I will sketch to show you..
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 24, 2013, 07:20:22 AM
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.

And thanks again for everything!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 24, 2013, 04:11:44 PM
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.

And thanks again for everything!!!


Good!!!! 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 24, 2013, 08:47:21 PM
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.

And thanks again for everything!!!

Hi Schiko,
I have not studied in deep your circuit yet, but the circuit that I posted -which was originally created by Patrick Kelly (in his ebook Chapter 3) and I have just done some small corrections- do the same sequence as the original Figuera rotary commutator with contacts 1,2,3 ....8,9,10 ....15, 16...(as Figuera wheel). Therefore this circuit make the right switching including the steps in the first and last contact  because it makes a pulse in 8 and later in 9 and then in 16 and 1. Maybe your circuit is an improvement but Kelly´s circuit do exactly what it is described in the 1908 commutator. This circuit just follow the contacts in Figuera´s drawing with the cylinder

I will study in deep shortly . It is good to have more variations to test, but I would start with Kelly´s design and later I would test your proposal

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 25, 2013, 05:10:46 AM
@Hanon
No problem my friend...  8)         just for the record, generate sine wave through the steps, much more steps better!  ;)

@ARIOVALDO
?????? Thank's  8)

@Bajac
You've built your H-bridge???  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 25, 2013, 09:17:07 AM
Hi all,
 
I attach here a patent about an overunity transformer filed by Carlos Subieta Garron (US3368141). If you read it you could see that he is looking for the same effect as the 1908 Figuera´s patent. Also I post two videos that you could find useful to understand the patent.
 
 
www.youtube.com/watch?v=orRvh4K8Qvc

www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8asKJNYJIY
 
Please post your comments about this patent
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2013, 06:35:50 PM
 It is just amazing!
 
If you recall, I also published "Reinventing the Wheel Part 2 and Part 3" showing designs with Permanent Magnets. The device shown in figures 4, 5, and 6 of Carlos' patent are almost identical to one of my embodiments that I posted in those documents. In my document I called coil B22 as the secondary and coils B18 to B21 as the control coils. The only difference between Carlos' design and mine is that he uses air gaps. Of course, my device would have not been patentable because they are obvious with respect to the devices shown in Carlos's patent. Again, I did not used air gaps in my design because I thought (as the mainstream science) that air gaps would make my design less efficient. Now that I know the Figuera's devices, I can say that Carlos' apparatus should be more efficient. As Figuera, Carlos found a way for minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law by using air gaps.
 
No wonder why I called my papers "Re-inventing the Wheel". We just keep recycling the old technology because it is not well known.
 
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 25, 2013, 08:28:11 PM
It is just amazing!
 
If you recall, I also published "Reinventing the Wheel Part 2 and Part 3" showing designs with Permanent Magnets. The device shown in figures 4, 5, and 6 of Carlos' patent are almost identical to one of my embodiments that I posted in those documents. In my document I called coil B22 as the secondary and coils B18 to B21 as the control coils. The only difference between Carlos' design and mine is that he uses air gaps. Of course, my device would have not been patentable because they are obvious with respect to the devices shown in Carlos's patent. Again, I did not used air gaps in my design because I thought (as the mainstream science) that air gaps would make my design less efficient. Now that I know the Figuera's devices, I can say that Carlos' apparatus should be more efficient. As Figuera, Carlos found a way for minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law by using air gaps.
 
No wonder why I called my papers "Re-inventing the Wheel". We just keep recycling the old technology because it is not well known.
 
Bajac

Hi bajac,

Time ago I saw another patent of a MEG based on air gaps but I can not find it again. If I get to find it I will post it here also. Carlos Subieta Garron literally writes in his patent US3368141: "The assembly will not work as an annular magnet, there should be a small air gap between the core member and the shoe poles" (please note the attached drawing with the air gap !!). Air gaps are used to "re-route" the magnetic field to avoid opposing the inducer coils, thus minimizing the Lenz effect over those coils.

All this agree with you theory. Also the lay-out is very similar to the one that you propouse for Figuera 1908 generator.  ;) . Some questions: Why do you think that this patent will be more efficient than Figuera generator?. Do you think that it is easier to build than Figuera´s device? (here it is only needed one AC input). Please can you elaborate your ideas a bit deeper?. Thanks for all your help!!

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 25, 2013, 08:31:45 PM
@Hanon
Could you explain why you thought the similarity between two patents?  ???
I have not seen!  :-[

In my mind patent 1908 has three aspects
1 - Reluctance
2 - increased electromagnetic section
3 - symmetry between the tensions of the primary lagged 180 degrees

Simple as a generator!  8)

For me the problem is to find the best ratio between primary and secondary inductance because it directly affects the resonance frequency of the magnetic assembly where the phenomenon occurs.
 
LF, HF will work no matter it all depends on the coils  ;D

There is an advantage of electronic commutator, adjust the frequency to any type of coil.

If you'll work fixed at 60Hz prepare for the difficulties of tuning coils  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 25, 2013, 09:01:36 PM
That makes sense and I do think we have something here. Air gap, very small one. Don't you guys think we can use dc coil instead permanent magnetic?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 25, 2013, 11:33:12 PM
That makes sense and I do think we have something here. Air gap, very small one. Don't you guys think we can use dc coil instead permanent magnetic?

Yes... air gap = reluctance

The machine of Mr. Figuera magneto is not necessary, in my case fumbled more than helped ...
If you observe the threshold of the negative peak of the sine wave never goes to zero volts, coils always a small current, adjust the threshold in your case is more difficult to increase or decrease the value of the resistors.
Find the right point helps the phenomenon I experienced this!  ;)

ps: when you arrive at the point of work, the cores will stay super magnetized!!!

abraço!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2013, 11:46:54 PM
Hanon,


I am sorry for the misunderstanding. I was referring to the performances between the device I disclosed and the device found in Carlos' patent.
I can only speculate that Carlos and I had the same reasoning, BECAUSE THE ENERGY MUST COME FROM A SOMEWHERE, A PERMANENT MAGNET WAS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE ENERGY SOURCE. However, Figuera and Tesla showed us that there are other more powerful energy sources that we just do not know about it. Figuera and Tesla taught us how to extract infinite amount of free energy from wires
Suppression or not, The truth is that these types of energy sources have been hidden from us for too long.


Regards,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 26, 2013, 12:14:29 AM
@bajac

Bajac you did not answer if you have finished your H-bridge???
So I am waiting for your tests.

I do not have large coils to test!

cheers!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 26, 2013, 12:36:35 AM
Schiko,


I have not finished the H bridge or my set up yet. It will take much longer than what I had expected to build my unit. I am hoping that a member from the forum could complete it soon.


I wanted to ask if someone knows of any dynamo or small motor/generator that can output two AC voltages shifted 90 degrees. If we can get such a unit, it would be very easy to do the input driver. We can use a small VFD driver to control the speed of motor driving the dynamo. For the 1908 device, if you want the output to be 60Hz, the input voltages should be 30Hz.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 26, 2013, 09:38:28 PM
I put a video showing the electromechanic oscillator operating. To say the true, I did't like it. The brush is the one that is rotating and doing that, the centrifugal forces is holding the brush without touching the commutator, so wave form is more a square than sine as should be.
Solutions for this system
1) increase the spring size
2) modify the the commutator/brush holder, so the commutator will turn


Others solutions:
1) solid state device ( hanon/Shiko)
2) use pure ac 60 HZ
3) modify a small generator and use as VFD to drive it. ( I do have a VFD and I will check generator)


The most important part is the transformer and I do know that. My intentions is modify the transformer in video, creating a small gap...

The transformer connections are based in the Grumage drawings

Cheers


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 26, 2013, 11:09:04 PM
I put a video showing the electromechanic oscillator operating. To say the true, I did't like it. The brush is the one that is rotating and doing that, the centrifugal forces is holding the brush without touching the commutator, so wave form is more a square than sine as should be.
Solutions for this system
1) increase the spring size
2) modify the the commutator/brush holder, so the commutator will turn


Others solutions:
1) solid state device ( hanon/Shiko)
2) use pure ac 60 HZ
3) modify a small generator and use as VFD to drive it. ( I do have a VFD and I will check generator)


The most important part is the transformer and I do know that. My intentions is modify the transformer in video, creating a small gap...

The transformer connections are based in the Grumage drawings

Cheers


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek)


Something very interesting happened !
As you can see in the movie, the light seems to be half way bright and the voltage that I used was 80 VDC.
As I said, the commutator was not OK, and it wasn't generating sine wave. Was a kind of pulse/square.
After the test, I disconnect the system and I connected 110 AC, at the same point, keeping the the 2 out-side coils in serie as was, and I had nothing in the output. I got some ideas for the next test
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 27, 2013, 12:06:15 AM

Time ago I saw another patent of a MEG based on air gaps but I can not find it again. If I get to find it I will post it here also. Carlos Subieta Garron literally writes in his patent US3368141: "The assembly will not work as an annular magnet, there should be a small air gap between the core member and the shoe poles" (please note the attached drawing with the air gap !!). Air gaps are used to "re-route" the magnetic field to avoid opposing the inducer coils, thus minimizing the Lenz effect over those coils.


I have been looking for that patent that I saw time ago with an air gap to achieve overunity in MEG. I have found some references. It seems that the "air gap" has a clear function to get a minimization of the Lenz Effect over the inducer coils. Just for the record these are the overunity references to air gaps in transformers:

http://www.overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/#.UkSESVN5DC0 (http://www.overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/#.UkSESVN5DC0)

http://www.overunity.com/11256/curious-ou-transformer-schnelzer-turtur-horvath-marinov-any-replications/#.UkSFc1N5DC0 (http://www.overunity.com/11256/curious-ou-transformer-schnelzer-turtur-horvath-marinov-any-replications/#.UkSFc1N5DC0)

http://pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/9600214_Energy_Anomaly_in_Magnetic_Circuits/ (http://pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/9600214_Energy_Anomaly_in_Magnetic_Circuits/)

http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/msg248924/#msg248924 (http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/msg248924/#msg248924)

Flynn patent US6246561: http://www.google.com/patents/US6246561 (http://www.google.com/patents/US6246561) (see figures 1 to 16)

We should give a greater importance to the air gaps as elements to minimize the Lenz Effect by redirecting the induced magnetic flux along others paths different than the inducer coil.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 27, 2013, 07:34:31 AM

Something very interesting happened !
As you can see in the movie, the light seems to be half way bright and the voltage that I used was 80 VDC.
As I said, the commutator was not OK, and it wasn't generating sine wave. Was a kind of pulse/square.
After the test, I disconnect the system and I connected 110 AC, at the same point, keeping the the 2 out-side coils in serie as was, and I had nothing in the output. I got some ideas for the next test

@Ariovaldo

Not wanting to disturb your fun but perhaps it was better to use a set collector / brush motor.
Your commutator seems to create great spark, I think there is too much space between contacts, remember Mr. Figuera said...

"a las delgas incrustadas en un cilindro de materia aislante que no se mueve; pero alrededor de él y siempre en contacto con más de una delga gira una escobilla"

Just above of this text he said...

"Para fijar las ideas es conveniente valerse de la figura adjunta que no es más
que un dibujado para entender el funcionamiento de la máquina que se
construya según el principio antes reseñado"


I understood that meant that drawing is just to understand the principle of the machine not to interpret literally.

Use collector as photo 1.
Use resitores all equal and measure with oscilloscope by using a resistive load at the output of the commutador and you have a waveform with this photo 2, the output of Transforming you will measure a sennoide almost perfect.

I know, I know you're having fun!!!  ;)             (uma imagem vale mais que mil palavras)

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 27, 2013, 06:30:49 PM
Schiko,
Please, refer to the post#58 of this thread. In the post, I posted the graphs of the voltages and currents. The waveform should be more triangular like step triangle. But, it is not the same condition when the load is pure resistive than when is an electromagnet. You will need to do a kind of impedance matching between the seven resistors and the coils to get the maximum AC/DC ratio of the input voltages.
Noticed that the air gaps shown in your pictures are too big.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 27, 2013, 10:21:00 PM
Schiko,
Please, refer to the post#58 of this thread. In the post, I posted the graphs of the voltages and currents. The waveform should be more triangular like step triangle. But, it is not the same condition when the load is pure resistive than when is an electromagnet. You will need to do a kind of impedance matching between the seven resistors and the coils to get the maximum AC/DC ratio of the input voltages.
Noticed that the air gaps shown in your pictures are too big.
Bajac

Hi bajac

I already thanked you hanon and others for everything they taught us, once again thank you!
I subscribe to the forum (reinventing the wheel) from the beginning and learned all that was said, I think, so do not worry about me I've been through that phase.

I have experienced much the device and was developed over time, but remember, I adopted another path that is: "high frequency between 400Hz and 40KHz",  "regenerate 12V", "with much more power on output that in the input" and "self-run working"...

I'm asking you if you've built your H-bridge because I've finished my, but I don't have many resources to mount the magnetic Assembly like yours, that's why I live bothering you with this question, sorry about that, I would very much like to see a set like your working with H-bridge and see if you can COP>1, in my setup I could only get 4 small transformers, worked fine but not exceed of 100% efficiency.  :-[

I get an almost perfect sine wave output for perhaps the difference from my system to its like I said I can control all parameters of the input signal.
And the pictures posted are old when I started working with this system Figuera 's, these photos are just for show "Ariovaldo" there are other more practical ways to build the magnetic Assembly and that work well within the same principle.
You know in the picture with ferrite core, 12V input and output almost 30V if I don't back off my cores 12V lamp would burn, so...

In fact I think that replicate this patent literally or as many have posted here won't be able to COP>1, this is the "my thinking" and I don't own the truth and I'm here to learn.

"I want to see the snake biting its own tail" auto-run is the word the rest doesn't matter!  8)

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 27, 2013, 10:47:13 PM
I don't have the material to replicate the patent as I would like too, but I do 2 set transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I will play with them. I ordered some 14 AWG magnetic wire that will be here next week.


Have a great weekend.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 27, 2013, 11:06:13 PM
I don't have the material to replicate the patent as I would like too, but I do 2 set transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I will play with them. I ordered some 14 AWG magnetic wire that will be here next week.

Nice cores...

Cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 01:10:05 AM
@ Schiko,
I want to congratulate you for your efforts. I think you are in the correct path.
You may ask as many questions as you like. The nice thing about a forum is that you can get different answers and views. That makes it more exciting!!
On the other hand, why do you think the Figuera's device would not work? Did you replicate it? If yes, could you post the device that you did your test?
I cannot say the same. I tested the device and the results were like nothing I had experienced before. I was telling Hanon that the short circuit test soldered the secondary leads together. I had to shutdown the device to cut the leads. I was not able to measure the short circuit current because I did not have an equipment with such a high current range. But amazingly, the primary current did not change, it just measured about 1.3A DC before and after the short circuit condition. During the short circuit condition, the transformer started vibrating and produced a loud Humming sound. I am so disappointed for not following the teachings of that setting. That is why I am rebuilding the tower to match the coil turns of that setting.

@Ariovaldo,
That core looks promising! It has good dimensions for a first trial.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 28, 2013, 03:02:14 AM
@ Schiko,
I want to congratulate you for your efforts. I think you are in the correct path.
You may ask as many questions as you like. The nice thing about a forum is that you can get different answers and views. That makes it more exciting!!
On the other hand, why do you think the Figuera's device would not work? Did you replicate it? If yes, could you post the device that you did your test?
I cannot say the same. I tested the device and the results were like nothing I had experienced before. I was telling Hanon that the short circuit test soldered the secondary leads together. I had to shutdown the device to cut the leads. I was not able to measure the short circuit current because I did not have an equipment with such a high current range. But amazingly, the primary current did not change, it just measured about 1.3A DC before and after the short circuit condition. During the short circuit condition, the transformer started vibrating and produced a loud Humming sound. I am so disappointed for not following the teachings of that setting. That is why I am rebuilding the tower to match the coil turns of that setting.

Hi bajac
Thanks for your words.  8)

See, when I say "doesn't work" I mean "not to produce more output than input" However my current device worked fine but didn't hit more than 100% yield.
Unfortunately I have no photo of the first device that did not work, who wants to show device failed.
You can show some really small device running on autorun, that's all I ask so I can cheer me up.  :'(

Your device that you got high current which commutator you used, mechanical or electronic??
I also can get high currents in mine, just depend on the coils that use, but never greater in power output at the imput.  :(

Excuse the writing ... that translator I get crazy he insists on changing the words I want to write, but I'm learning heheheeh
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 03:58:49 AM
Bajac

It looks as though some excellent progress is being made here. You say that standard transformers do not have air-gaps, however normally they are built up of laminations.  Although these are primarly to stop eddy currents, do not the small gaps between the laninations, caused by the coating of varnish not add in small air-gap?

Kind regards

John


John,


The lamination is done such that a low magnetic path is formed in the direction of the flux lines. There is no insulation added to the connection between two laminated parts forming a closed magnetic path. But, the insulation is added between two parallel laminated parts configured in a closed path. Because the Eddy currents are induced perpendicular to the path of the flux lines, the insulation between parallel lamination is an efficient way for minimizing these parasitic currents.


The standards transformers are designed to have a minimum core reluctance, and therefore, the goal is to maximize the core permeability. The consequence of the latter is that the core will have the maximum number of magnetic flux lines for a given ampere-turn (NI) of the primary coil. And because the cross-section of the core is just large enough to avoid saturation (at knee part of the saturation curve), the maximum cost/benefit is obtained in terms of KVA to pound ratio. In other words, the design criteria of standards transformers is to maximize the power transferred to the load while keeping the size of the transformer to the smaller possible dimensions (volume). Please, note that the configuration of these transformers will always have an efficiency lower than 100% as explained in the document describing Figuera's 1908 apparatus.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 04:30:58 AM
Hi bajac
Thanks for your words.  8)

See, when I say "doesn't work" I mean "not to produce more output than input" However my current device worked fine but didn't hit more than 100% yield.
Unfortunately I have no photo of the first device that did not work, who wants to show device failed.
You can show some really small device running on autorun, that's all I ask so I can cheer me up.  :'(

Your device that you got high current which commutator you used, mechanical or electronic??
I also can get high currents in mine, just depend on the coils that use, but never greater in power output at the imput.  :(

Excuse the writing ... that translator I get crazy he insists on changing the words I want to write, but I'm learning heheheeh


Schiko,


You seem to be a little disappointed with your experiments. The major mistake you made was not to disclose your setup even if it did not work. You are not the only case. I hear people complaining that they had built the Figuera's apparatus and no results were obtained. When I asked to post photos of the setup, the devices did not really follow Figuera's teachings.


I could tell you that the Figuera's devices do not operate at high frequencies.


A big mistake I made was to dismantle the unit that I showed in post #58 before completing all the tests!!!


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 28, 2013, 06:23:42 AM
Hi bajac
Disappointed, a little, but I still have hope!  :)
I don't want to create controversy that's enough the discussions at the beginning of the forum, but from the beginning nobody was able to show a single device running on autorun, it seems odd to me because the patent claims that there will be abundant energy in fact I think there's something else on the device built by Mr. Figuera that is not in the patent that it would be very natural and whatever the secret was with him to the Tomb, I'm not affirming anything but that's what I think.  ???

But I didn't give up, since nobody's going to show me a device as is in the patent running on autorun, keep trying in other ways, not following the patente literally and searching for the secrets...  ::)

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 28, 2013, 08:52:04 AM
Hi


Do you have any link to detailed explanation about laminated core ?  I have to understand how it is build, work and how it is produced (the steps involved).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on September 28, 2013, 04:19:23 PM
Hi


Do you have any link to detailed explanation about laminated core ?  I have to understand how it is build, work and how it is produced (the steps involved).

Maybe in Europe it does not work, but in the US when I have a question, first I try to find an answer on internet, usually on google.This time I've just put the two words "laminated core" in the proper box. I guess, the short and appropriate answer could be this, from "wiki-answers": http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers)

"What is the purpose of laminating an iron core in transformers?

 Answer:

The reason we laminate the iron cores in transformers is because we want to limit what are called eddy currents. Transformers are basically two coils of wire wrapped around a core of iron. They work by induction. Induction occurs when current flows in one conductor (or one set of windings in the transformer) and the magnetic field that forms around that conductor (that set of windings) sweeps the other conductor (the other set of windings) and induces a voltage. In order to increase the effectiveness of the transformer, we need to improve the way the magnetic fields are coupled from one set of windings to the other set. Iron conducts magnetic lines of force well, so we use that to help conduct the magnetic lines of force from coil A to coil B. Problem is, iron is also a conductor, and it's being swept by the magnetic field as well. If we didn't use laminations, the iron core would provide a place for the magnetic lines to produce (induce) current, and that current flowing in the core would heat the core up really fast and waste energy. By laminating the cores, we break up the current paths within that core and limit eddy currents."

Also, good source of knowledge is, as always, on WikiPedia.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 07:09:33 PM
The internet is a good source for finding information about anything.
Here is a pdf document that has a summarized description:


http://www.navymars.org/national/training/nmo_courses/NMO2/module2/14174_ch5.pdf (http://www.navymars.org/national/training/nmo_courses/NMO2/module2/14174_ch5.pdf)


 [size=78%]http://www.magmet.com/pdf/TransformDesignConsiderat.pdf (http://www.magmet.com/pdf/TransformDesignConsiderat.pdf)[/size]


Wikipedia: [size=78%]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer)[/size]







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 28, 2013, 07:25:29 PM
Thank you guys. First I did a research but that had not removed my doubts. I have dismantled EI core from transformer and I did it many times trying to replicate JackNoSkills setup. What always astonished me were a marks on each E or I parts like they are composed from a tiny iron wires pressed together. I always thought laminated means that core is combined from a many separated shapes like E+I parts, but HOW THAT PARTS are made is what I WANTED TO KNOW. I know they are covered by some very thin lacquer but that's all I know.
Can you find information WHEN laminated cores become popular and cheap ? COULD Figuera used DIFFERENT setup of core ?

:-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on September 28, 2013, 10:33:40 PM
Hej forest,

In USA patents the oldest mention of laminated transformer cores date back to around 1890-91 when 4 patent applications were filed:
US461135,  US528188,  US581873,  US602218  but they were granted later in different years.

This means that Figuera must have been aware of laminated cores from the year of 1891 (US461135) and onwards.

You can see some drawings on different shapes in the above patents. (I did not search non-American patents to check for dates.)

Gyula

PS:  I use http://www.pat2pdf.org/ for retriving US patents in PDF files (when you know patent numbers, that is).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 29, 2013, 01:27:38 PM
Maybe in Europe it does not work, but in the US when I have a question, first I try to find an answer on internet, usually on google.This time I've just put the two words "laminated core" in the proper box. I guess, the short and appropriate answer could be this, from "wiki-answers": http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers)

"What is the purpose of laminating an iron core in transformers?

 Answer:

The reason we laminate the iron cores in transformers is because we want to limit what are called eddy currents. Transformers are basically two coils of wire wrapped around a core of iron. They work by induction. Induction occurs when current flows in one conductor (or one set of windings in the transformer) and the magnetic field that forms around that conductor (that set of windings) sweeps the other conductor (the other set of windings) and induces a voltage. In order to increase the effectiveness of the transformer, we need to improve the way the magnetic fields are coupled from one set of windings to the other set. Iron conducts magnetic lines of force well, so we use that to help conduct the magnetic lines of force from coil A to coil B. Problem is, iron is also a conductor, and it's being swept by the magnetic field as well. If we didn't use laminations, the iron core would provide a place for the magnetic lines to produce (induce) current, and that current flowing in the core would heat the core up really fast and waste energy. By laminating the cores, we break up the current paths within that core and limit eddy currents."

Also, good source of knowledge is, as always, on WikiPedia.


 Then why do they not use the same techniques to form the laminations as they apply to a bucking autotransformer winding to increase or decrease the magnetic feild within the laminations. Simple enough to connect a couple of laminations on the ends. You could go as far as to make the laminations form a multilayer capacitor.
 Maybe the trick is in the number of free and mobile electrons and if there are more of them in a given space would'nt it be easier to interact with them using a magnetic field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 29, 2013, 05:01:06 PM
check this http://www.overunity.com/12465/patent-from-1920-that-looks-like-coler-stromerzeuger/topicseen/#.UkhAT6K8DOT (http://www.overunity.com/12465/patent-from-1920-that-looks-like-coler-stromerzeuger/topicseen/#.UkhAT6K8DOT)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 29, 2013, 07:51:25 PM
Hi guys

I think you guys are looking for water in a desert ...
Magnetítico flow is important, I mean all research is important, but more important is the resonance "this is the key word," If you learn how to take advantage of the extra energy that is generated when any system enters in resonance you rule the world.  8)

Resonance can be your friend if you learn to treat it with care and attention, but can also become angry and destructive if you don't respect it.
Treat it as if it were your wife and she will reward you.  ;D

ps: in technical school always teach us that "resonance" can cause disasters and should be controlled at all costs, maybe it's time to think different!
RESONANCE is where the interesting stuff really happen

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 29, 2013, 08:56:14 PM
This is supposed to be a Figuera thread. Can we stay on message please.
If you have other stuff to say then by all means start a separate thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 29, 2013, 10:17:35 PM
This is supposed to be a Figuera thread. Can we stay on message please.
If you have other stuff to say then by all means start a separate thread.

Those words were to me???

I think I'm completely within the subject Figuera 's, but if you didn't understand what I said, I can't do anything about it, just ask cordiality of its part, anyway I think didn't offend anyone so far.

Just put a subject for all we think, if someone show a device Figuera's operating in self-running presentation I would be very happy.  ;)

I am struggling with this device since the beginning of the thread so I think I have every right to express myself here, independent of their will or understanding.

but still I hope you understand and think a bit before you write ...

Sorry for anything I have written that did not please you!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 01:04:35 AM
It's not aimed at anyone. Too many threads go off the rails and invite other people to write even more. It would be good to have posts  which either proved or disproved Figuera. I am of the opinion that all science is valuable even if it doesn't work.
I tried moving a variable resistor manually and did not see anything. That is a positive contribution - even if it was a fail.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 30, 2013, 06:17:03 AM
Too many threads go off the rails and invite other people to write even more. It would be good to have posts  which either proved or disproved Figuera. I am of the opinion that all science is valuable even if it doesn't work.

I understand what you mean, and I agree!  :-X

Quote
I tried moving a variable resistor manually and did not see anything. That is a positive contribution - even if it was a fail.

I'm sorry that I don't understand, you're saying that tried and failed ... is this???  :-[

Because I tried it and it worked, just didn't come out more power than entered, worked as a good voltage inverter, just this.
that's why I'm here to find out where did I go wrong ... If I did wrong.
But I have faith in the device design maybe with some modification it work indeed.

It seems that this week we will have news here... stay tuned.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 10:16:31 AM
Yes, I meant I did not see overunity. But my experiment was just a casual one to see which way to proceed.
I am wondering about something.
AT this time 1900 to 1920 it was common to use an interrupter with a coil. Many schematics did not even show the interrupter as it was understood to be a part of all coils. Maybe that is what is missing.
AN interrupter is of course a Tesla switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 01:05:19 PM
Yes, I meant I did not see overunity. But my experiment was just a casual one to see which way to proceed.
I am wondering about something.
AT this time 1900 to 1920 it was common to use an interrupter with a coil. Many schematics did not even show the interrupter as it was understood to be a part of all coils. Maybe that is what is missing.
AN interrupter is of course a Tesla switch.
If is that, we are talking about to mix 2 frequencies again..Is that right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2013, 01:23:04 PM
If is that, we are talking about to mix 2 frequencies again..Is that right?


 ::) ::) ::)   ;D ;D ;D ;D  Yes, in special case.  Now I know you are EE, can you answer the simple question ? How we can magnify current but not voltage ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 02:06:34 PM

 ::) ::) ::)   ;D ;D ;D ;D  Yes, in special case.  Now I know you are EE, can you answer the simple question ? How we can magnify current but not voltage ?
Is that a million dollars answer?  Just kidding.  RESONANCE?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 02:15:39 PM
Resonance? It depends on which definition. EE definition you need a capacitor ie tank circuit.
Tesla definition is longitude  wave. ie radiant energy. I don't remember Figuera  mentioning resonance or capacitors.
You amplify current by using step down transformer. Of course you lose voltage so power stays the same minus losses in the circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 02:20:48 PM
As i said in one of my posts, I have 2 sets of transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I had the windings done in the primaries of one set. Is 360 turns of 14 AWG aluminum magnetic wire. My plan this week is to test several configurations. As you can see, the sets are composed of 2 "C" and one "I". In the picture number 15, I put a small insulated plate to make a "gap" between the elements.
Any suggestions for test?


Ari
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 02:34:01 PM
Resonance? It depends on which definition. EE definition you need a capacitor ie tank circuit.
Tesla definition is longitude  wave. ie radiant energy. I don't remember Figuera  mentioning resonance or capacitors.
You amplify current by using step down transformer. Of course you lose voltage so power stays the same minus losses in the circuit.


That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 07:52:11 PM

That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?
Well... you are starting to sound like the Barbosa-Leal patent from Brazil.
http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html)
about 1/3 rd of the way in the document.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2013, 09:04:17 PM

That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?


Good path.
You already know the answer I'm sure ;-) Sometimes the answer is very confusing....  The simplest way to rise amperage without rising voltage is ....by having the second power source adding electrons at the same voltage level......  ::)     


C'mon...you already saw that picture.... that's how noise is generated to hide the truth by mixing real info with garbage....
If you can take second battery and attach in parallel to the power source at the same voltage then you have the simplest way to rise amperage without rising voltage. Now... the "magic" is to find a way how to do this with AC and 2 frequencies .


That is the special case Steven Mark said "another time" and you already saw the picture explaining it.....just find a picture with two signals drawn by red pen....the noise level is astonishing....

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 09:10:59 PM
Well... you are starting to sound like the Barbosa-Leal patent from Brazil.
http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html)
about 1/3 rd of the way in the document.


Yes, I know that. I will run some tests with the transformer and I need to find out a place to put the results. This tests will be a mix of everything that I can think about the transformers, like the myths that the magnetic flux will divert and release the primary (Lenz law) if we add a alternative path in the transformer...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 01, 2013, 12:05:50 AM
This was the first look be at my understanding of the original patent.
with all three coils equal, primary and secondary example 200 turns, magnetic wire 18 ... This was my first test.
No load was all normal, but when the secondary is loaded the voltage drops and the primary amperage increases, so far so good as any transformer, but varying the frequency it happens something strange, secondary voltage increases and the primary amperage decreases as there was no great loss but does not reach 100%, and depending on the adjustment of frequency and other parameters comes very close of 100%...
The test was done with just a small laminated core, will be that  affect much the core size, not amperage e voltage but effect FE?  ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 01, 2013, 12:37:40 AM
Schiko,

Watching the shape of your signals I think that maybe your are using resistors of very high value. For that reason you just get high values in the contacts close to the inducer coils (both sides: contacts 1 and 8 ). If you use smaller resistors you could get an increase more steady in your signal. Which is the value of your resistor?

What frequencies are you using in your tests? Remember that Figuera used a small motor to rotate the brush around the commutator. Therefore I guess that he could be used a maximun of 2900 rpm. I  think that his generator does not rely on high frequencies. Maybe he operated his commutator to get comercial 50 Hz AC current (Europe), but this is just my oppinion.  Also remember that he used soft iron cores: I suppose that soft iron has a maximun proper frequency. Does anyone know which is the maximun frequency to be used with soft iron?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on October 01, 2013, 12:48:35 AM
Re cores:  There's something to add about this.
In a later patent by Bufon, he shows a diagram in which  the cores are less than half way in the primaries.
Also he states  that you can substitute the cores for a coil and this coil will generate voltage which can make the device a self runner.
I tested a solenoid with an ex tv small coil inside instead of the core and it did produce a good current and voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 01, 2013, 02:23:00 AM
Hi Hanon
This photo I took of a post I made here #304  <   Link-1 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/300/#.UkoCeNLIUko) > has nothing to do with the circuit that I used in the first test was only an outline. The trafo is on the same link is the third picture. And the circuit that I used is this link #288 < Link-2 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/285/#.UkoFQ9LIUko") > controlling 9 Mosfet with resitores of 4 ohms. The frequency was around 30 to 300 Hz.   The waveform did not have peaks as big as those of this photo here. Now I use an H-bridge  I will standby the tests of Ariovaldo.  If ok I'll see if I can get a big transformer to replicate and post too here.

Hi a. king21
It's true, I've seen.
I tried that too but gave the same.
The core I used was the same as the link 1.

cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on October 01, 2013, 03:17:20 AM
There is something else to consider. The original patent resembles an old style motor car distributor cap -  except with more contacts. That setup is almost certain to create sparks. Even if the make before break does not create an actual spark the sudden abruptness of the constant switching is bound to create a radiant effect. So we could be looking at a Tesla switch type situation with static mixing on each resistor contact.
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz.  My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the  cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process. It could be that by introducing static into the switching process we could emulate the 2008 device.
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please  understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each switching contact has a MHZ oscillation in it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on October 01, 2013, 03:29:01 AM
There is something else to consider. The original patent resembles an old style motor car distributor cap -  except with more contacts. That setup is almost certain to create sparks. Even if the make before break does not create an actual spark the sudden abruptness of the constant switching is bound to create a radiant effect. So we could be looking at a Tesla switch type situation with static mixing on each resistor contact.
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz.  My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the  cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process. It could be that by introducing static into the switching process we could emulate the 2008 device.
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please  understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each hz has a MHZ oscillation in it.
If you take a look in the youtube video that I posted days ago, using the rotary device in a tranformer, the lights just went on when the rotary device got problem and start to spark...do you think the original patent use HV?
I like this line of thinking..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on October 01, 2013, 04:30:03 AM

Yes Ariovaldo. Great video - actually it's the first time I've seen it.I read up about spark gaps in an old book. If your spark gap  is too small it leads to a dead short. Then the frequency goes down to your switching rate. If your spark is just right your frequency goes into the mhz range.
Voltage: Figuera talks about emulating mains.
So he must be inputting 220 to 240 volts at 50 hz.

Here's some info on spark gaps from an old book on radio telegraph construction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 01, 2013, 07:42:52 AM
a.king21
Quote
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz.  My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the  cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process.

I understand what you mean, but I think today using spark-gap does not make sense to me is spark-gap as a capacitor dielectric stuck and generates many harmonics difficult to control, now if you want a lot of tension just to have enough alternating current and a transformer with secondary large and well done. Look I do not want to finish with the fun of nobody but that's what I think.

a.king21
Quote
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please  understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each hz has a MHZ oscillation in it.

It is true, I agree.
But I really believe in resonance. And some circuits work fine using BEMF damped. This is my way. I see everyone putting diode in parallel with the coil, I think better to use capacitor in parallel with transistor and use part of the wave and reinject in the circuit. As was used in old tv's
Making a mix of coils Figueira, Thane Heins transformer and others may be we can find a way, I don't know ...

After I read it I was curious here ...
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/inductive_conversion.pdf
But that is a topic for another thead.

cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 01, 2013, 09:48:23 AM
Here is strange question if you can help me ?... If there is transformer having one secondary and two separate primaries each one connected to the separate AC power source what parameters should have those currents to combine into 2 times power output on secondary ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on October 01, 2013, 07:44:11 PM
Here is strange question if you can help me ?... If there is transformer having one secondary and two separate primaries each one connected to the separate AC power source what parameters should have those currents to combine into 2 times power output on secondary ?

I suppose the voltage outputs of the two AC sources must be in phase and if the two separate primaries are identical, then the input in-phase voltages would add in the single secondary.  Of course the cross section of the core should be rated for handling the higher output power. 
I also suppose:  you assumed the output voltage amplitudes of the two AC sources are identical too, as are the inner impedances .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 02, 2013, 10:18:41 PM
  The waveform did not have peaks as big as those of this photo here. Now I use an H-bridge

Hi Schiko,

Maybe if you have implemented a H-bridge circuit to genereate both signals you could post the schematic. It will very helpful for other users!

In the first posts in this forum Bajac recommended to use a stepper motor controller with microstepping. If you note in the picture below you could get the unphased signals if you can join A+C outputs and B+D outputs from this controller.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 03, 2013, 02:45:12 AM
Hi Schiko,

Maybe if you have implemented a H-bridge circuit to genereate both signals you could post the schematic. It will very helpful for other users!

HI Hanon
I'll draw the schematic and post here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on October 03, 2013, 06:08:11 AM
Hi all,

I do not know if this will help, I found this while looking for info on H-Bridge, http://www.robotpower.com/downloads/Simple-H-user-manual.pdf . It can be used as single H-Bridge, 2 each half-bridges, or combined 2 half bridges to double Amp's.

When used as H-Bridge or half-bridge, Voltage 6V – 24V (28V absolute max). 25A cont. at 100%, 20A at 70%, 45A 5 second peak

When used combined, 48A cont. at 100%, 38A cont. at 70%, 70A 5 second peak.

I do not know how long this device (Simple-H HV, with fan) will run continusly. I am planning on calling them 3 Oct 13 to get some more info. Will Let you know what they say.

If you look at the manual, What are your thoughts about this?

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 03, 2013, 07:27:01 AM
@RMat

Good ... how much ...
For those who already have arduino would be great!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on October 03, 2013, 02:48:35 PM
The Simple-H (3V-5V inputs) $49.99, the Simple-H HV (4V-28V inputs) $59.99, and the 12V 50mm Fan with mounting kit $7.00.

You can order them from the website at http://www.robotpower.com/catalog/ . They also have different ones available.

Hope this helps.

Bob

P.S. This info was on the site for the Simple-H :
"The Robot Power Simple-H is a low-cost robust H-bridge circuit suitable for use driving DC motors and other DC loads in the ~25A and 6V-28V range. A wide range of command sources from switches to 555 timer circuits to microcontrollers, BasicStamps and Arduinos may be used to control the Simple-H. The classic "green" Simple-H requires 3V-5V logic level signals on its command inputs.

The Simple-H does not have any on-board logic to interpret R/C, serial, analog voltage or other commands. An external signal source is required to translate command inputs into the switching signals needed to drive the Simple-H power chips. This flexibility allows the Simple-H to be driven from a signal source as simple as a pushbutton or as complex as a microcontroller or BasicStamp. Even a desktop or laptop PC can be used through a parallel port or USB port expander."

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on October 03, 2013, 07:16:34 PM
I talked to a man at Robot Power about the Simple-H HV. He stated that if it were run below 20 Amps, it should run continuously without any problems. He also stated that they have some models that will handle up to 80 Amps, but those are more exspensive.

Hope this is helpful.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 05, 2013, 12:21:35 AM
I know, I know ... thread out  :-X
Nobody has shown so far in Figueira device self running as I do not like spark-gap still trying to adapt the device "Figueira" to something more modern.  ???

Here could be a way...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo   Would anyone agree?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on October 05, 2013, 04:45:52 AM
I know, I know ... thread out  :-X
Nobody has shown so far in Figueira device self running as I do not like spark-gap still trying to adapt the device "Figueira" to something more modern.  ???

Here could be a way...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo)   Would anyone agree?


Interesting. He use 400 watts ballast. Now, how can we use this power? Motors....?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 05, 2013, 05:58:20 AM

Interesting. He use 400 watts ballast. Now, how can we use this power? Motors....?

You watched the 3 videos?
part-2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd_3lCG1oiI
part-3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOEdFI1qXCU

Perhaps the 4th video it add a real load.
The idea interested me, my problem is when I loaded the secondary transformer "out of tune" and the power drops this idea maybe help me.
First I want to see self-running, then I think about power.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 05, 2013, 09:41:37 PM
Thats not gonna work ,it's been tried before.
 To get a self runner you have to get more from someplace enough to cover whats consumed to the load and to cover the losses. What is being manipulated differently that a different reaction would happen? A pound of flux is still a pound of flux. The same flux going round the same way as usual from one pole to another around a closed path.Even with two paths the pound of flux is just allowed to loosely travel the two. It does not increase the number of lines or how they are intercepted. The total is still the same but with maybe a chance for more losses.
Title: Possible Winding for patent No. 30378 (1902)
Post by: hanon on October 06, 2013, 02:34:21 PM
Hi all,

I have been thinking about possible winding schemes for patent 30378 (motionless generator, year 1902). I don´t know if I could be right or not, but I have realized a feature which could minimize the Lenz effect over the inducer coils (I think).

The concept is described in the attached picture below. This winding is based on having 2 induced magnetic fields which flow in opposite directions along each inducer coil. If you see the picture, you can note than in each inducer coil there are two induced magnetic fields (one created by that induced coil and one created by the next induced coil). These two induced magnetic field are in oppositon to each other. Therefore the decrease in induced coil strength as consequence of the first induced field is compensated by the increase in that coil strength done by the second magnetic field. Thus, a minimization of the Lenz effect in each inducer coil could be obtained.

Could these proposal be right? Please comment. (Note: Remember that there was another proposal done by Bajac for this patent winding that you can find here: http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/)  )

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 06, 2013, 05:21:33 PM
Well at least your trying to reduce losses. Thats a good direction. How would you double the flux seen in the induced with out expending more current to do so?Better yet if you could along the way of increasing the flux could cancel the current at maximum operating saturation that would be even better. It would regulate the activivty.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 07, 2013, 04:56:49 PM
Schiko,

I was also thinking about using "tuned" transformers as almost every coil Tesla used was operating on a "harmonic" or resonate frequency. And apparently, Mr. Figeura and Mr. Tesla, if nothing else, knew each other or at least had knowledge of each other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 07, 2013, 11:50:43 PM
Hi all,

About the concept that I referred in my last post to achieve two induced magnetic flows in opposition (which cancel each other) I have found some links where this concept is applied. It is called the "F-machine" or "F-Transformer" and it resembles slightly to the Gramme machine :

http://www.alternativkanalen.com/ph-machine.html (http://www.alternativkanalen.com/ph-machine.html)

As you could note in the next link this device also needs an air gap to avoid the return of the induced field into the primary coil:

http://en.shram.kiev.ua/top/invention/invention2/2.shtml (http://en.shram.kiev.ua/top/invention/invention2/2.shtml)

I have posted these links here in order to discuss if this concept can be applied to Figuera´s  patents. Please post your comments.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 08, 2013, 07:15:50 AM
Hi all

I'm just an old electronics technician. With old ideas. And I don't consider myself very smart to answer a few questions for sure. But I think the image of the post http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg372131/#msg372131 shows what I think about the subject.
Unfortunately I can't express myself very well in English, I'm trying, but I don't know if I'm to get ...

I don't think Mr. Figuera had exotic ideas in mind when he conceived the machine.
If we think simple, perhaps, get good results too.

I'm making new experiences, when possible, I show you here to discuss.
Cheers
pic's by Wikipédia resonance page

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Spring_resonance.gif (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Spring_resonance.gif)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Standing_wave_2.gif (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Standing_wave_2.gif)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 08, 2013, 10:23:31 AM
Schiko


Would you be so nice to  help me and in reality all of us to solve some mystery related to what Figuera knew ? It require simple experiment but with tools I can't afford or borrow  :(  : good digital scope with power integrating/computing a signal generator and a ferrite core transformer custom made probably (ferrite because it has to have stable inductance), luxmeter.
First let me describe context : everybody knows that by placing a bulb in resonant tank circuit (a bulb with stable resistance, preheated for example) will allow to light it to the same light intensity consuming less power from source.


The question is simple : can we do that placing tank circuit on primary of transformer while bulb is connected to secondary ?
YES/NO - has to be experimentally proved !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on October 08, 2013, 12:58:24 PM

The F-machine resembles >>Thane C. Heins bi-toroid transformer<<, http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0 or just use google for more info.

The other link shows an article of Hartiberlin (Stefan Hartmann), the owner of this forum. It's more than easy to get him for an answer of concerns regarded here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 08, 2013, 07:47:12 PM
The F-machine resembles >>Thane C. Heins bi-toroid transformer<<, http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0 (http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0) or just use google for more info.

The other link shows an article of Hartiberlin (Stefan Hartmann), the owner of this forum. It's more than easy to get him for an answer of concerns regarded here.

Thane Heins transformer is based on a different concept than the F-machine. Thane Heins try to redirect the induced magnetic flow along the path with lower reluctance but he does not use any air gap. On the other hand, the F-machine is based on compensatig both induced field flowing in opposite direction into a closed magnetic circuit (toroid), and it needs and air gap between the inducer coil and the toroid.   My question is:

Could be right to try to compensate opposite induced fields in the 1902 patent?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 08, 2013, 07:50:28 PM
Would you be so nice to  help me and in reality all of us to solve some mystery related to what Figuera knew ? It require simple experiment but with tools I can't afford or borrow  :(  : good digital scope with power integrating/computing a signal generator and a ferrite core transformer custom made probably (ferrite because it has to have stable inductance), luxmeter.
First let me describe context : everybody knows that by placing a bulb in resonant tank circuit (a bulb with stable resistance, preheated for example) will allow to light it to the same light intensity consuming less power from source.
The question is simple : can we do that placing tank circuit on primary of transformer while bulb is connected to secondary ?
YES/NO - has to be experimentally proved !
Firstly, for me, the ultimate test for any device "OU" is: energize the lamp and auto running at the same time.
Sophisticated tests do not interest me, because I do not have such equipment of tests. So...
This is for you to understand my "line of thinking".

As for the third video Transverter, explanation is very convincing in theory I think possible.
But see, this would be an attempt to solve my problem in high frequency setup.
But the control of the switches is very sophisticated for me.
In moment, I decided to go back the origins, after advice from bajac, and see where I failed.
Thinking of Figuera device as a "simple generator" is easy to see the current gain, but the gain in voltage happens in scale, better saying, associating multiple sets of coils to allow the gain in voltage.
For me, it's going to be difficulty build coil tuned in 120 Hz, central frequency of machine for 60 Hz on the way out, I think that's where I failed.
But i keep trying, HF and LF setup, let's see what happens.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 09, 2013, 01:17:23 PM
The 08 pat does not support the idea of flux redirection nor does the design of the device. There would be too much leakage of flux for it to be effective. Sharp turns just don't cut the mustard. If there were any critical effects of sending the flux around the outside frame it would have been round with no edges or corners.A wire core or flat material wrapped in a circle would have been the depiction in that time period.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 09, 2013, 09:45:52 PM
The 08 pat does not support the idea of flux redirection nor does the design of the device. There would be too much leakage of flux for it to be effective. Sharp turns just don't cut the mustard. If there were any critical effects of sending the flux around the outside frame it would have been round with no edges or corners.A wire core or flat material wrapped in a circle would have been the depiction in that time period.

Which patent are you referring as "the 08 patent? The patent from 1908, or the patent No. 30378? In any of both cases the drawing it is just an sketch. Also in both patents is written that the drawing is just to understand the concept but different configurations may be implemented under the same concept.

About patent 30378, the close external magnetic circuit which surround all the electromagnets must have the objetive of keeping the magnetic flux into it as in any other generator. What else if not? .  I won´t take as an important feature the detail that the drawing has sharp edges.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 21, 2013, 01:27:32 AM
Hi all,

Please check some very interesting posts about Figuera´s generator in the forum at EnergeticForum done in these last days

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html)

Please post your comments about the proposal discussed in that forum.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 21, 2013, 01:48:44 PM
Still not done getting all the reference materials together to support my explanation.I think I will stick with this forum though nothing personal. An effective machine will take a lot of material mass to be large enough to use for primary power supply. I already figured out how large a generator in a IC form I would need to replace the grid would have to equal a 59hp gen to safely cover peak usage safely with out over straining. Need to learn an entirely new math as well and replicate some of the old 1800's test equipment. Today I am helping someone replace their plumbing and going over my own heating system.Cold weather is moving in fast.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 05:25:07 AM
Hanon:cheers:  This just for you and everyone. I know you have a hard time deciphering the Clemente Figuera's Egg of Columbus.

I have attached a schematic below, this should be wound on a annular ring/ferrite toroid for better performance.:blowout:

L1,L2,L3,L4 is the starting of the winding of this 4 coils on the toroid,the winding start is CW facing to side of toroid the winding should be going inside to your chest- like the winding is coming from below hole of toroid to exit on top hole of the toroid going inside to your chest.

On the schematic you will see that the 4 wound coils is group in two pairs. L1 and L2- The start of L2=CW is connected to the end winding of L1=CCW.

 You will understand Tesla's way of winding is simple, its only a persons mind that made it difficult to understand Tesla. I already told people here that Tesla intended to leave this patents and illustration for all(average minded) people.

L3 and L4- The start of L3=CW is connected to the end winding of L4=CCW.

Simple as that. All four wound coils should start with CW. About the magnetic field and magnetic flow you only need a compass and voltage supply test experiment.

The Two Primaries function like a flip flop, when the L1 and L2 is ON-Maximum Field on Generator, the L3 and L4 is OFF- Neutral Field on Generator. When L3 and L4 is ON, L1 and L2 is OFF. The secondary are all wound starting CW, its a matter of choice how you connect the Secondary like series or parallel.:thinking:

 This machine is powered with 2 Phase Alternating Current- which is actually a DC Magneto Generator Tesla converted to perform on AC with the used of genius Commutator design. That is the reason people for 135 years dont take interest on such beautiful design, for they dont know what is the lacking key to such beast. The patent:confused:  will be hard to decipher if no one will guide you how to understand such beast machine. I have already given to you the simplest path to such beast machine:eek: . You can build it like a size:D  of your home. LOL:rofl:

Once you understand this Egg of Columbus you will understand all patents of Clemente Figuera in a simplest form, You will also find which is lacking and the real operation and function of such machine. Clemente Figuera drawed the illustration on a different ways for confusion.:v-peace:

Dont forget to take credit for Nikola Tesla:hug: . This winding configuration is the same with the Tesla Bifilar Pancake when you deeply understand this winding configuration.:notworthy:

@Everyone :notworthy:  you can design a simple Flip Flop/4017 + H Bridge just for testing for all to replicate this machine.

The patent below is the same on the schematic . Figure 2 and Figure 3.
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-390,413-electrical-distribution

Meow:rofl:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 07:38:22 AM
The key is already been given to us long time ago. Tesla  called this Rotating Magnetic Induction Machine=Rotating Transformer/Converter=Electro Dynamic Induction Machine.Tesla had use cleverly the Law of Induction Machine on his Motors/Converters/Transformer.
Tesla called this device on a simple term- Egg of Columbus. 

All your confusion will be clear ones you will understand the concept behind this device.I think its time to revive this thread again, I already posted this before but nobody seems to take interest. 

I know exactly the TPU, Barbosa and Leal Device, Tariel Kapanadze Lenzless Converter,Stanley Meyer VIC,Don Smith Toroid Devices,Clemente Figuera, works exactly the same with this principles. 

The Electro Dynamic Induction Machine is wound with 4 coils groups with as 2 sets. Basically we have two Primaries that each primary is wound diametrically opposite with two Coils= 180deg apart on annular ring. 

The power supply could be AC and DC.   

On DC Supply we need a reversing polarity controller on each coil. We will use the 4 Terminal of the two set of coils on DC Supply. We will need a 4 sequence flip flop switching on this to simulate and replicate the action of an Alternating Current.

On AC Supply we need a TWO phase Alternating Current Generator.We will use only 3 Terminal of the two set of coils, they share common Ground on the 3rd Terminal/Post.

Operation. Lets say: COIL A and COIL B. Lets device this on a 4 quarter cycle.

1. 1st quarter cycle. COIL A(the LEFT-[Positive] AND RIGHT-[Negative] wound coil) is now on maximum magnetic strength, energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 Degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 12 O'clock.

2. 2nd quarter cycle. COL B(The TOP-[Positive] and Bottom-[Negative] wound coil) is now powered by the 2nd phase/lines of supply=flip flop. Is now on maximum magnetic strength while the COIL A is minimum magnetic field.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will move to point 3 O'Clock.

3. 3rd quarter cycle. COIL A(LEFT-[Negative] and RIGHT-[Positive] is again maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 6 O'clock. COIL B on this quarter is minimum strength which means OFF.

4. 4th quarter cycle. COIL B(TOP-[Negative] and BOTTOM-[Positive] is again on its maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity. Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90Degress. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 9 O'clock. And lastly repeat the 1st quarter cycle to fully turn or move the magnetic rotation of the Magnetic Compass(Pointer).

I already wanted to reach this to you before. But no one is interested until a man name machinealive had interest on the Rotating Magnetic Field/Rotating Transformer.He is the one you should thank  for he encourage me to post this on this thread. I already give you everything which some has keep as secret. But there is no such thing as new on their invention, the new to this people is using their common sense. There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.

This device when properly understood is somewhat you guys call the LENZLESS Generator. Don't limit yourself with using only 1 coil windings. Imagination is your limit.I think I have now clear all your confusion.

Background of this Concept.

Read all if you wanted to understand it very much.Please focus on Transformer illustration and drawings. Remember it is powered with TWO Phase Alternating Current Generator. The Induction Motor of Nikola Tesla is the same with this Electro Dynamic Induction Machine/Converter. Some times you can see 4 sets of wire powering this Motor or Converter. You can also see 3 wires with common ground of the two phase alternating generator.

Tesla Patent 381,968 - Electro-Magnetic Motor

Tesla Patent 382,280 - Electrical Transmission of Power

Tesla Patent 390,413 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 382,282 - Method of Converting and Distributing Electric Currents

Tesla Patent 381,970 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 390,414 - Dynamo-Electric Machine



Meow ;D ;D ;D :o 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bbem on October 26, 2013, 08:26:58 AM
The key is already been given to us long time ago. Tesla  called this Rotating Magnetic Induction Machine=Rotating Transformer/Converter=Electro Dynamic Induction Machine.Tesla had use cleverly the Law of Induction Machine on his Motors/Converters/Transformer.
Tesla called this device on a simple term- Egg of Columbus. 

All your confusion will be clear ones you will understand the concept behind this device.I think its time to revive this thread again, I already posted this before but nobody seems to take interest. 

I know exactly the TPU, Barbosa and Leal Device, Tariel Kapanadze Lenzless Converter,Stanley Meyer VIC,Don Smith Toroid Devices,Clemente Figuera, works exactly the same with this principles. 

The Electro Dynamic Induction Machine is wound with 4 coils groups with as 2 sets. Basically we have two Primaries that each primary is wound diametrically opposite with two Coils= 180deg apart on annular ring. 

The power supply could be AC and DC.   

On DC Supply we need a reversing polarity controller on each coil. We will use the 4 Terminal of the two set of coils on DC Supply. We will need a 4 sequence flip flop switching on this to simulate and replicate the action of an Alternating Current.

On AC Supply we need a TWO phase Alternating Current Generator.We will use only 3 Terminal of the two set of coils, they share common Ground on the 3rd Terminal/Post.

Operation. Lets say: COIL A and COIL B. Lets device this on a 4 quarter cycle.

1. 1st quarter cycle. COIL A(the LEFT-[Positive] AND RIGHT-[Negative] wound coil) is now on maximum magnetic strength, energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 Degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 12 O'clock.

2. 2nd quarter cycle. COL B(The TOP-[Positive] and Bottom-[Negative] wound coil) is now powered by the 2nd phase/lines of supply=flip flop. Is now on maximum magnetic strength while the COIL A is minimum magnetic field.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will move to point 3 O'Clock.

3. 3rd quarter cycle. COIL A(LEFT-[Negative] and RIGHT-[Positive] is again maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 6 O'clock. COIL B on this quarter is minimum strength which means OFF.

4. 4th quarter cycle. COIL B(TOP-[Negative] and BOTTOM-[Positive] is again on its maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity. Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90Degress. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 9 O'clock. And lastly repeat the 1st quarter cycle to fully turn or move the magnetic rotation of the Magnetic Compass(Pointer).

I already wanted to reach this to you before. But no one is interested until a man name machinealive had interest on the Rotating Magnetic Field/Rotating Transformer.He is the one you should thank  for he encourage me to post this on this thread. I already give you everything which some has keep as secret. But there is no such thing as new on their invention, the new to this people is using their common sense. There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.

This device when properly understood is somewhat you guys call the LENZLESS Generator. Don't limit yourself with using only 1 coil windings. Imagination is your limit.I think I have now clear all your confusion.

Background of this Concept.

Read all if you wanted to understand it very much.Please focus on Transformer illustration and drawings. Remember it is powered with TWO Phase Alternating Current Generator. The Induction Motor of Nikola Tesla is the same with this Electro Dynamic Induction Machine/Converter. Some times you can see 4 sets of wire powering this Motor or Converter. You can also see 3 wires with common ground of the two phase alternating generator.

Tesla Patent 381,968 - Electro-Magnetic Motor

Tesla Patent 382,280 - Electrical Transmission of Power

Tesla Patent 390,413 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 382,282 - Method of Converting and Distributing Electric Currents

Tesla Patent 381,970 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 390,414 - Dynamo-Electric Machine



Meow ;D ;D ;D :o 8)


Hello Stupify12.
I just want to say 'thank you very much' for sharing your knowledge about Tesla's ideas and inventions.
I read all your posts at OU- and EF- fora[size=78%].[/size] :)


BTW
Maybe you know the answer to the question of Bruce_TPU:
"[size=78%]How do dual rotating magnetic fields help us?  WHY is that important?  Stop guessing at it and study physics involving said current/magnetic fields and you will find the answer."[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
Any idea?


Regards, Bert

Ps. I share your view about the importance of the capacitor (bifilar testla coil beeing capacitor and lenz-less).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 10:43:16 AM

Hello Stupify12.
I just want to say 'thank you very much' for sharing your knowledge about Tesla's ideas and inventions.
I read all your posts at OU- and EF- fora[size=78%].[/size] :)


BTW
Maybe you know the answer to the question of Bruce_TPU:
"[size=78%]How do dual rotating magnetic fields help us?  WHY is that important?  Stop guessing at it and study physics involving said current/magnetic fields and you will find the answer."[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
Any idea?


Regards, Bert

Ps. I share your view about the importance of the capacitor (bifilar testla coil beeing capacitor and lenz-less).

 ::)There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.  ::)

I already found the answer to that question. Build this machine and experiment  from what you understand on its magnetic field and flow. Once you have understand and build have this machine. Everything will be easy for the dual rotating magnetic field. You can make magnetic flow the TWO Magnetic
 
It will be easy for you to understand the dual rotating magnetic field=Helix DNA Waveform Generator=Lenzless Generator the most advance cyclotron a physics could think of.

Everything will follow once you fully understand such beast.The Three Primary TPU is a imperfect design they wanted to force to rotate the Magnetic Field,But Tesla did it naturally on his Rotating Magnetic Field Concept.

Meow ;D ;D ;D :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 03:21:48 PM
Hi all,

Please check some very interesting posts about Figuera´s generator in the forum at EnergeticForum done in these last days

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html)

Please post your comments about the proposal discussed in that forum.

Regards

http://www.popsci.com/science/gallery/2011-09/archive-gallery-first-appearances-notable-scientists?image=8

Toward the end of the interview, we asked Tesla which arena of science most appealed to him. While we expected him to mention radios and airplanes, Tesla answered that rotating magnetic fields were dear to his heart. "A thousand years hence, the telephone and the motion picture camera may be obsolete, but the principle of the rotating magnetic field will remain a vital, living thing for all time to come."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 26, 2013, 04:23:35 PM
The opposite of consumption is conservation. Conservation is not without activity when the act of conservation is self imposed by the activity.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 26, 2013, 07:49:24 PM
hello all
Stupify: I have been working last weeks with this subject, (Figuera), but not about the rotating field.
As I centered in the 1908 patent, in which the mag. fields are alligned, not rotating but rather fluctuacting from one side to the other (flip-floping ??)

IMHO the way to avoiding Lenz in the two series of inductors, is by means of the progressive addition of resistances after the commutator, (make before brake). So the input V never pases below 0 volts and therefore, no BEMF nor polarity reversal.In addittion, the air gap allows the collector to "produce" AC not influencing the inducing coils.
In my experiments, I reduced the number of resistors, and use a 12 pieces commutator, 3 resitors 100 ohms and 3 direct shunts (see schematic A).
Observed the following:
Spikes are produced at the brushes and also red light observable with one leg of neon bulb.
Variable DC Voltage at the collector higher than the input (after rectified & E. cap), but works with inductive loads, and not with resistive loads. (no amperage readdings yet).

I have been readding your posts very attentively, here and in the other forum, as well as the a.king21 ones.

I will give a try to this schematic you posted so will you be kind to help me with it ?

Is the toroid complete, or with 4 air gaps ?
Is it ferromagnetic ?, (I can make one with plastified iron wire,bailing wire)
Are the two primary winded over a secondary? if yes, should be these secondary in series as one coil ?
And lastly, what do think of using a commutator as B in the attached schematic ? I know that the ON will be longer that the OFF, but equal for both primary sets. It is moved by a small printer DC motor, so the rpm will be not so high (frequency)
thanks
cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 27, 2013, 04:51:38 AM
hello all
Stupify: I have been working last weeks with this subject, (Figuera), but not about the rotating field.
As I centered in the 1908 patent, in which the mag. fields are alligned, not rotating but rather fluctuacting from one side to the other (flip-floping ??)

I have been readding your posts very attentively, here and in the other forum, as well as the a.king21 ones.

I will give a try to this schematic you posted so will you be kind to help me with it ?

Is the toroid complete, or with 4 air gaps ?
Is it ferromagnetic ?, (I can make one with plastified iron wire,bailing wire)
Are the two primary winded over a secondary? if yes, should be these secondary in series as one coil ?
And lastly, what do think of using a commutator as B in the attached schematic ? I know that the ON will be longer that the OFF, but equal for both primary sets. It is moved by a small printer DC motor, so the rpm will be not so high (frequency)
thanks
cheers
Alvaro

The toroid is a complete ring no air gaps on this machine, no toroid splits on the annular ring..The magnetic flow on this machine never collide but moves like "catch me if u can"

Ferromagnetic=if you mean powdered iron,Tesla prefer soft iron which so many splits like a laminated. Ferromagnetic Powdered Iron is the best choice for the annular ring.

The primary is wounded first on the ring, The secondary is wound above the primary. Primary is first layer, Secondary is second layer but what ever how you wound the primary and secondary anything will work.. The patent on Tesla Toroid/Transformer shows how to wind the primary and secondary direction. All coils=primary and secondary wound started with CW. 
The secondary can be wired series or parallel it depens upon your choice, for there is also 4 wound coils of secondary on top of the Primary.

Any commutator will work. but you should put in mind the change of polarity on each Primary.

First, Lets say the COIL A is left=positive and right=negative.

 Second:The next On is COIL B, Top=positive and Bottom=negative,
Third : The next ON Coil is COIL A in reverse polarity, Left=negative and Right=Positive.
Fourth: The next ON Coil is COIL B in reverse polarity, Top=negative and Bottom=positive.

Keep in mind that when the commutator is about to change to the next coil, There is a time that the BOTH COIL A and COIL B turns ON before it proceed to Another Quarter. Like the First Quarter and Second Quarter will ON Together before it proceed to Second Quarter.

First Quarter> First Quarter + Second Quarter> Second Quarter> Second Quarter+ Third Quarter> Third  Quarter>Third Quarter + Fouth Quarter> Fourth Quarter> Repeat from the beginning. ;D ;D

I think I have answered your question correctly. Good luck and Take care ::)

Meow ;D ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 27, 2013, 09:47:47 AM
Stupify
thanks for the detailed answer
I´ll have to diggest it slowly, and take my time.
I see that the polarity reversal is not possible with my present comm. setup.
will study how tesla did it. (I´m not skilled in electronics)

I understand the lenzless efect, but still do not catch where comes the excess of energy from a rotating mag field. I have got to see it with a working device, as my imagination has its limits !! :P

Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 27, 2013, 03:13:51 PM
Reversing the fields will never yield a self runner.Too much waste in fighting self induction, reluctance. Hannon you were on the right path in Reply #375.  Every stich of flux has to leave the induced from inducer in cyclic order. One is declining but in order for it to totally be evacuated the opposing has to push the remaining reminance completely back to where it came from. Any number of lines left behind will defeat the action by the same amount acting like a brake. The greatest amount of change in the induced in a stationary device can only be had by filling up with the magnetic flux then removing it completely. The only way to remove it totally is to have the opposite push out the remaining with another of the same which fortunately constitutes a 2nd pulse on the induced. If the window of activity is too small it will be a week effect and generate heat. The space for the induced will have to be adjusted to the effective working area of the inducers the measure of space where the fields can move back and forth based on the strengths of the inducers fields. Since you have decided to build by way of winging it. Your restricted in the physical size of your device because you placed the build of the cores before the desired output. Electromagnets are considerably stronger then perm magnets and the amount of voltage and current placed into an electromagnet may be far less then your imagining it should be.The amount of wire also makes a stronger magnet.
   You can also take into account some well documented facts about transformers. A trafo with no load other then to keep itself magnetized is 5 to 7 percent of the rated load output. For it to just sit there bouncing its field back and forth or round it;s core depending your point of view ,very little power is consumed. Until you place into the same magnetic path another coil that supplies a load with power. The same field is then threading both coils in a complete circle in a transformer ,the translation is one of a direct nature in a transformer.All the power must be supplied directly by the shared flux passing both coils. Avoid sharing and you avoid the drain on resources. Better still have two competing fields and the drain on resources is reduced with a greater output just like in the real world The only effect you need look for is the changing flux that resides in the induced. The ultimate load or work cares little how you changed the flux so long as it is changing. The more it changes the better so make the change a complete one. I believe the removal of the flux will be harder in the circular version.A inductive load may well be required to make it work but the news paper article mentioned he had a number of lights and a 20hp motor running in his home. The motor may have had some positive effect to counter the resistive load of the lights. I do not recall any mention to the motor actually being used to perform any task or work leading me to think it may have been an unloaded motor used to reinforce the timing in the induced circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 28, 2013, 07:12:40 PM
@ Doug1
I agree with you!
Every explanation will end in simple voltage inverter optimized, not autorun device.  :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 28, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
no, but you would not see the difference  :-[
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 28, 2013, 10:01:24 PM
no, but you would not see the difference  :-[
Hi
Well, nowhere in the patent I read something about "more power output than in input" quite the contrary ...
So what do you say? You could see?

Part of Tesla patent 390.413 posted on previous page...

"In these systems, as I have described them, two independent conductors were employed for each of the independent circuits connecting the generator with the devices for converting the transmitted currents into mechanical energy or into electric currents of another character; but I have found that this is not  always necessary, and that the two or more circuits may have a single return path or wire in common, with a loss, if any, which is so extremely slight that it may be disregarded entirely."

Mas se alguém conseguir auto-execução eu pago a cerveja!!!
But if someone can autorun I pay the beer!!!  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 29, 2013, 01:15:40 AM
Hi
Well, nowhere in the patent I read something about "more power output than in input" quite the contrary ...
So what do you say? You could see?

Part of Tesla patent 390.413 posted on previous page...

"In these systems, as I have described them, two independent conductors were employed for each of the independent circuits connecting the generator with the devices for converting the transmitted currents into mechanical energy or into electric currents of another character; but I have found that this is not  always necessary, and that the two or more circuits may have a single return path or wire in common, with a loss, if any, which is so extremely slight that it may be disregarded entirely."

Mas se alguém conseguir auto-execução eu pago a cerveja!!!
But if someone can autorun I pay the beer!!!  ;)

I think your one of the people that really dont understand easily the patent of Nikola Tesla. On that quote he was comparing the old Induction system to the New Nikola Tesla Induction System. Well you need more readings and review look for the Twice the revolution on the Induction System.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 29, 2013, 04:29:33 AM
I think your one of the people that really dont understand easily the patent of Nikola Tesla. On that quote he was comparing the old Induction system to the New Nikola Tesla Induction System. Well you need more readings and review look for the Twice the revolution on the Induction System.

I like to tease the "Forest" he is very critical and sagacious, it causes good discussions.

I deserved this comment, no problems, but honestly what I understood of the patent was following: is a device or more efficient method to coupling a generator or source to a load, just this.
But if you've discovered a way to optimize the device or method, I'm happy for you, and please teach us how to replicate your method or device with details.

Thanks, in advance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 29, 2013, 11:13:15 AM
sorry Schiko, I have give you answer and it is always in experiments. Because I have no way to show you results and prove my point that's all I can say. You would see no difference if you don't follow the experiment which can open your eyes
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 29, 2013, 05:22:31 PM
sorry Schiko, I have give you answer and it is always in experiments. Because I have no way to show you results and prove my point that's all I can say. You would see no difference if you don't follow the experiment which can open your eyes

No problem my friend, I understand your point, but I want to make clear that I have done many experiments. Because of this sometimes I seem skeptic with some subjects, but it is only appearance.
Experiments is that some apparently very promising in theory but in practice fail gloriously.
My point is: apparently no one will take away power useful FE devices without using complicated electronics.
But I'm open eyes.   :o
I keep trying.   8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 29, 2013, 05:53:42 PM
Schiko, my friend


I'm not sure if I understood your comment, but the process of complication of FE devices using electronics is known to me and I can assure you that the more complicated it is the less usable output it can produce.  ;) 
The best inventions was simple, even without using electronics or using old vacuum tubes for example.
Those were the most covered up and lost from public space because if you cannot complicate things up to the certain level you cannot stop ordinary people from "escaping from the system" when they start  building own resources system...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 29, 2013, 07:48:25 PM
 hello all
this discussion is very interesting, and I have got something to say too:
This thread is dedicated to Clemente Figuera patents, replicas and experiments/ and opinions on their principals, which is a very concrete field. I therefore do not understand why Tesla patents have to be extensively discussed everywhere.
I understand that these kind of devices are all related, and also that the Tesla concepts/devices are very captivating, but there are already hundreds of places dedicated to it.
Understand me well please, it is NOT that I am trying to censor anyone in anyway, it is just the tiredness to get Tesla in every soup.
I felt very often this Schiko statement about people that promotes things but doesn’t show any auto-run device which is the goal of many experimenters here, me included.
At least, some of them as Bajac show their attempts and their failures too, which is a constructive way of contribution.
Hope not having offended anyone. :-[
Regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 30, 2013, 06:59:42 AM
@forest
My friend, if you permit, I will disagree with you.
Electronics of Power has evolved a lot today.
You've heard about "Cascade Multilevel Inverter"?
Imagine the machine of Mr. Figuera coupled in this technology, we could easily get to Megawatts.
If we can make the machine of Mr. Figuera do work, of course.
Let's be more pro-active if we leave aside the "conspiracy theory".
I agree that some things were purposely suppressed, I'm not EE, but I'm sure that many of these patents do not pass the examination in the departments of standardization.
Some have dangerous radiation, others are unstable and many do not deliver what they promise.
If the ancients were able, we also be able, but we must use techniques and modern knowledge and get the best possible result, not being locked into exotic ideas of the past.
This link is for you to think and modernize their thoughts.  <<Cascade Multilevel Inverter>> (https://www.google.com.br/search?q=Cascade+multilevel+inverter&sa=X&biw=1259&bih=687&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=XBWHUZGaO5Ke8QTS1YG4DQ&ved=0CDIQsAQ#imgdii=_)

Forgiveness, if any phrase be strange, because I do not write well in your language, but I think pass the message.  :-[

@ALVARO_CS
Thanks for your words!
Do you speak Portuguese?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 30, 2013, 10:47:17 AM
 @Doug:
Reread your post, and find very close meanings to my own thoughts.
Quote: “Reversing the fields will never yield a self runner”- is something I have suspected but only may stand it as an intuitive feeling, not rational nor proven fact.
Quote: “Avoid sharing and you avoid the drain on resources. Better still have two competing fields and the drain on resources is reduced with a greater output “ -IMO here is the function for the air gap
In general (talking about the 1908 patent),your description of the mag fields remanence in the inductors, and the way both push one to the other is what I see.
I have posted here several times that the voltage (wave) never falls under 0V, and so never occurs  
a polarity reversal, but there is a kind of ping pong game between the two inductors.(but no one  here has commented in agreement or dissent  :-X )
Do not know why the patent refers  to the inductors as “electromagnets”, and the induced as “induced coils”, could it be that the induced is just an air core coil ? :o :o

 

 
@Schiko:
Very interesting the link about cascade multilevel inverter, I read  some articles from it. Unfortunately I am stuck with this concept of no polarity reversal. ;D
Unfortunately also I do not speak Portuguese, only Spanish, French and English, but I can read  and understand  it if slowly spoken.
Will be glad to have this beer you offered as soon I get my autorun device !!! ;D ;D ;D
muito obrigado pelo convite ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 30, 2013, 12:21:38 PM
Alvaro
 If the induced has need of it's own core it would only be to focus the field into the center of the coil (induced) to avoid distortion effects felt by nearby fields of the other electromagnets. I spent a good bit of the last evening looking references to pole face geometries which might also help to focus the field into a more beam like pattern even millimeters of focus would be helpful to reduce scattering the field as soon as it leaves the end of the magnet. A second problem I come up against frequently is the notion of amp turns/ If more more turns yield more induced magnetisim per current but also increases more resistance due to length of wire. Why not use the desired length of wire/turns cut into the lengths of less resistance making a it multi stranded? Is it really just a question of whats easier to work with? I would hate to think world sucks just because people are lazy.I can live greed more so then lazy.
 I have found a few references to that but it seams to be in early stages of study with generator applications. The focus of interest seams to be over the difficutly of the diminishing strength of a field per unit of distance and how the conductors at the greatest distance have to be adjusted in length accordingly to avoid voltage differences between conductors or strands. Not doing so tends to build up excess heat in the windings and alters the dilectric capacitance leading to shorts between turns at higher frequencies and gets worse with temperature build up. The hotter it gets the lower the frequency need be for break down.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 30, 2013, 01:26:29 PM
 Doug: Thanks so much for such a constructive comment. Clever analysis.

 
I think that the resultant output Figuera wanted was close to an AC current & Voltage, and this is  the induced result of a progressive positive input into the two opposing electromagnets.
At his time AC used in Spain was at 110 volts 50 Hz. (only hot line & neutral, NO ground)
I am also intrigued about this common negative return, “al origen” because in the drawing, it shows a third segment of lead. . . . may be it was connected to ground (earth) ??? will try it.
Remember that Spanish patent offices in 19 century were not controlled by Edison friends, and therefore there was not so strong constrictions to the “perpetuum mobile” concepts.

 
In my line of thinking, in this device there are not colliding magnetic fluxes, but rather a movement similar to the seesaw work done by two lumberjacks pulling alternatively, not pushing.

 
As I am working at a small scale (economic restrictions) and as I do not need AC 50Hz output, I am using a sharp transition between the two alternatively biased electromagnets.(via 100 ohms resistors)
Attached a pic of the commutator set up I´ll use. My main concern is now in the coils & cores geometry.
For now the comm. Is moved by a printer DC motor fed by an adjustable PC PSU (modified) which allows me to vary the frequency in a short range.
The main input is provided by a PS 12V 2A (from wifi modem)
Any suggestions are welcomed.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 02, 2013, 02:42:27 PM
Alvero
  A persons economy has little to do with anything. Resourcing materials starts with understanding what the materials are and looking for where you can get it for free.People throw away stuff all the time.Unless you live in some remote jungle there will be stuff. Its always a good idea to evaluate your local resources both free and for sale. Have you ever read on the original pancake motor? The short version best I can remember. The guy was broke, so had to come up a creative way to obtain his materials to make the stator and rotor cores. He didnt want to take money from his family's food budget so as a result of limited finances they had to shop around for good deals on food.He came across someone selling off old stocks of canned vegetables in number 10 cans at a penny each. He purchased enough cans of food to solve both problems. He used the cans to make the laminates of the cores by hand. I would like to think if he had unlimited funds he would have never bothered or he would have not done such a good job because his mind set would have been so different that he would not have cared so much or had a need to make a better motor that used less power. Lack of funds is never a downside, just a greater opportunity to show case the human spirit.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on November 02, 2013, 06:12:43 PM
 Hello Doug1
I never said or thought (nor complained) that to be broke is a limitation. I just explained why I am working at a small scale, not that I feel it as a downside.
I have indeed developed from long ago a friendship with some vehicle repair shop owners that keep for me all sort of small DC motors and other parts they discard.
The same with all the superintendents of the neighbor buildings, with discarded electrical appliances. (unbelievable the things people throw out)
“the garbage of a man is the treasure of another”  
I learned well to make the most of resources as I lived with  my family for 12 years in a jungle at the Venezuela-Brasil border. (beautiful place called “La gran Sabana”)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kukenan_Tepuy_at_Sunset.jpg (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kukenan_Tepuy_at_Sunset.jpg)
In fact I am a rich man because I have many friends and . . . much time !!  :D :D :D
regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 02, 2013, 07:06:59 PM
That's good to hear all around. particularly that you have access to auto motive parts. A alternator stator would make a very good outer section with some mods to the teeth where the wires lay in. To turn into a quad pole structure with some teeth removed at the desired gaps to wire it up as a quad /4 pole. Then you only have to build the internal section to mirror the stator section. The voltage regulator will come in handy.
  I didn't think you were complaining sorry if I came off that way. I was just thinking of how many times the easiest route leaves a person hanging high and dry with lots of money spent but no results. Plenty of people don't even try because they think you have to spend 50k on equipment. The best proof of all that something works is getting off the grid.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 03, 2013, 01:57:11 PM
Alvero
  Looks like a nice place to live,very peaceful. Im not one for city living but I could be happy on the Savanna with no problem. I hope yours never gets spoiled by tourists. We get a lot of them here and I have to say I don't care for them too much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 03, 2013, 02:16:36 PM
Forgot one thing.The third segment of lead, how ells would it go back to the origin? Make yourself a model of batteries.Small objects all the same so you can visualize the system. writing the values down as you go round the circuit. Paper tends to run out of room too fast. Have you ever come across a book on the net called "Dynamo electric Machinery A Manual for Students of Electrotechnics." It might help to see things from the perspective of what was taught during the proper time period.By Silvanus Phillips Thompson Dated 1888. Google has a downloadable copy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 07, 2013, 12:40:06 AM
 
Quote
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics

Nikola Tesla utilized a "Radial" Wound Coils Geometry...where wires travel from one end to other end of the total Armature Diameter. We utilize "Axial" Wound Coils in most of all our Electrodynamic Machines...where Coils are wound in the Outer Periphery of the Armature Structure.

About Figuera´s patent with a rotary winding (No. 30376):

 I am almost sure that Figuera in his rotary drum patent  (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf) used radial windings. I am afraid that using axial windings will not get the same results: with an axial winding the induced magnetic field will be opposed to the induced field. With a radial winding in Figuera´s machine the induced magnetic field will be at right angle to the inducer field, IMHO.


 According to the winding proposed by Bajac (posted some weeks ago) the Figuera patent 30376 should have a wire between two poles, then it crosses diametraly the drum, passes between the other two poles in the other side and again crosses diametraly the rotating drum. With this winding you get an  induced magnetic field which is at 90º of the inducer magnetic field. Therefore no Lenz Law is reflecting back to the inducer coils. ( I think - if I have interpreted fine that document-)

Here I  post an schematic for implementing the Figuera´s rotating drum winding for patent 30376 that I think that it has some advantages over a standard winding as drawn in simple form in the original patent. It may work with the same magnet polarity all around the external side. It is a winding with an "8" shaped coil in each turn. It creates two induced magnetic fields, B1 and B2,  with opposite directions. As each semi-turn has different induced polarities then those two field maybe can go in a circle around the central hole without affecting the inducer electromagnets.
 
 What do you think?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 09, 2013, 01:31:46 PM
It's an interesting winding concept. Im not sure about how it will react to the otter section of the device. Or if the induced field will not simply attempt to complete the magnetic loop by diving into the left or right part of the cross. If it did ,it would be very uneven in it's field strength.The strongest field or greatest amount of force being in the corners and less at the extremedies giving a voltage difference with in the turns themselves. Then would generate a lot of heat. Then you have to deal with getting all that wire through the central hole for all four posts without damage to the insulation of the wire. That's a pretty tall order. While it may work well for a single drum shape of a rotor I dont think it will be as effective for a compound of four drums connected together as a cross.JMO
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 09, 2013, 05:24:35 PM
Hi all,
 
 About the discoveries done by Clemente Figuera in 1902 the New York Times published the 9th of June of 1902 (link (http://orbo.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Star08jun1903.gif)):
 
 "His inventions comprise a generator a motor and a sort of governor or regulator"
 
 Figuera in 1902 patented two devices:

       -A motionless generator   (patent 30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf))
       -A rotary drum generator  (patent 30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf))

If the description by the NY Times is right then Figuera used a motor. Then it is possible that the device that Figuera showed to the journalist is the one which needed a motor to rotate the drum. If so, we can think about the two devices patented by Figuera in 1902 that the one which was built and operated was his rotary drum generator with 3 parts:

    1- A generator:  the rotary drum and the electromagnets
    2- A motor: a small motor used to rotate the drum
    3- A governor: ??

Maybe the motionless generator (patent 30378) was just a theoretical extrapolation of his working rotary drum generator, which was actually the device that Figuera built.
 
 Regards

PS:  Doug, we have to remember that the winding used by Figuera was the standard square diametrical winding. The "8" shape coil winding is just a proposal. I think that, as a first step, the winding to be replicated is the one used by Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 09, 2013, 11:50:34 PM
Now that I have a copy of the drum patent  :o That type of winding and pole geometry is very much like some home built wind gens. Difference being they spin the magnets on two plates spinning opposite directions on a flat plane with the induced between. Im sure someone must have tried going the other way as well. I think your gonna boil down to a basket weave motor theory used as a gen. Another difference is most examples use perm magnets witch are weeker then electric ones.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 10, 2013, 01:15:07 PM
Now that I have a copy of the drum patent  :o That type of winding and pole geometry is very much like some home built wind gens. Difference being they spin the magnets on two plates spinning opposite directions on a flat plane with the induced between. Im sure someone must have tried going the other way as well. I think your gonna boil down to a basket weave motor theory used as a gen. Another difference is most examples use perm magnets witch are weeker then electric ones.

Doug, Could you provide any link where we can see those home built win generator that you refer? I would like to check the differences and similarities.

 I think the main advantage of the desing by Figuera is that the induced field is at right angle to the inducer field, and therefore there is no interation, so no Lenz effect is reflected back to the inducers electromagnets. I think that in wind generators the induced coil is wound so that the induced field is in the same plane as the inducer field. Figuera wound it so that it is in aperpendicular plane as is drawn in the scheme provided in one of the previous post. Please share your thoughts.

There are good schematics in this link:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11885-my-asymmetric-electrodynamic-machines-194.html#post242983 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11885-my-asymmetric-electrodynamic-machines-194.html#post242983)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 10, 2013, 05:08:52 PM
It's called an "Axial wind turbine" there is a lot of sites which have a lot of info trial and error to get some ideas from. The difference it is not based on a drum but kept flat. Perm magnets used on both sides of the induced coils. They place the magnets on the opposing frames which the wind blades mount to which is constructed to handle the stresses involved.Big bulky machine to keep it from flying apart. The simularity is the magnetic field relationship to the induced coil in a multi coil system on a circular frame. Change the perm magnets to electromagnets,place the same coil arangement around the drum for the induced and give it a turn.
  I dont know if you will see any similarity at all I guess it depends on what you interpret is the key feature difference in figuruas idea. I dont believe he used a completed magnetic path like transformer. Im thinking it is more like crashing two fields together of the same sign and moving the fine line between them back and forth to produce a difference of field in the induced. In a drum form the fine line would be stationary with alternating distances measured from the center axial point.Rotating the induced coils around between the pole faces.Each inducer being a pair of electromagnets would be alternately shifted in strength so one or the other dominates the induced as it revolves around. Turning only the induced coil which has less mass and there by requiring less force to do so makes it some what counter to what the axial turbine does which is to turn the mass holding the magnets and propeller. Not very clever unless you like giant blades whirling around in the middle of the night. The turbine uses permanent magnets facing N to S completing the magnetic path though the induced as with any ordinary system including a transformer. The key difference as he states well ,:it's not like a transformer". A transformer or the like builds a magnetic field with a primary then adds a secondary "drain" to the single magnetic path taking more power to satisfy both from the source. The changing flux in the induced is at the expense of the primary power source at a rate equal to or more then the secondary is taking.The field set up by the primary once started consumes very little only 5 to 7 percent of the full load on the secondary. Can you imagine getting 10.000 watts of work done at the cost of 500 watts. The physics is simple,balance any object of any size or weight on a narrow rectangular block, fix the block to the object.Then walk the object on the block pushing down slightly and turning it half way around then lift and turn it back .It takes very little to move something so big you cant even budge it other wise. If I had two perm magnets each able to lift 1000 lbs and  pushed them together N to N and left a 1 inch gap then move a coil in the gap closer to one magnet then closer to the other changing the field in the coil as it crosses the shearing point of the two fields resulting in a difference equal to 1000 lbs of force each time the coil crosses the line between the two fields. The induced does not care how you made the change just that you changed it. More flux more speed of change gets you more out. The individual fields of the inducers loop back on themselves to make a complete path for each magnetic field in itself.On a planar view one is left handed the other right handed with a concentrated repelling force in the middle expanding outward to a greater distance then the opposite side of the respective magnets which explains his choice of pole face geometries. The extremedies of the cores flair out to lead the flux as it tends to expand anyway by repulsion where they face each other. Producing a larger diameter field to use a larger surface area induced coil without expending more current grabbing a greater amount of flux in the induced.It might even be more evened out to avoid setting up eddy currents between individual turns of the induced.For such a simple drawing it could be very complex in reality. So there is my thought.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 11, 2013, 05:50:18 PM
If we suppose that the device that really worked in 1902 was the one with the rotary drum, maybe Figuera was trying to emulate those rotating dinamic interations in his final 1908 patent where he proposed the use of two unphased signals. Maybe he tried to simulate those rotary interactions into a motionless generator. I think that his idea was to get induction by flux cutting in his 1908 device, as it is common in any movable generator: all the induction is due to the lines which cut the induced wires [ Induction by motion: E = Length · B · v ·sin(alpha)  ] and no induction is derived from flux linking [Faraday Law: E = S · dB/dt ]

As stupify has stated the use of a two phase AC current (what in fact is composed by 2 unphased signals) can emulate a rotating magnetic field

Also I have noted that when two identical inducer signals are used the lines of force are enclosed into the magnetic circuit: maybe you can shift polarity but the lines of force are always inside the core. BUT, I think that if two non-identical signals are used then the lines of force are not always enclosed in the core, because most of the lines just encircle the electromagnets which is at full power in each moment, being only completely enclosed into the core in the instant when both electromagnets induction is the same. Those lines of force swing back and forth between one electromagnets and the other following the time frame when each one is at full power (here I am following a scheme similar to Buforn patents where the 3 coils are in the same axis).The flux lines move IN and OUT from the induced core. THEREFORE: the magnetic lines cut the wires of the induced coil in each swing. And thus, you can get the same effects which exist into a common movable generator but just using a motionless generator!! (in movable generators induction is achieved only by flux line cutting).

The objetive is to get the induced wire cut by the flux lines.

While a electromagnet is increasing in strength the flux lines are encircling it tighly and leaving the contrary electromagnet; and while it is decreasing in strength the flux lines are expanding toward the electromagnet which is getting more powerful in that moment. It is a constant swing of flux lines between both electromagnets. Maybe this action will induce in the proper sense so that the induction into the induced wires will be created in the right direction to power the inducer field instead of make it weaker as usually happen in the Lenz effect. I am refering that the counter induced field act in the reverse way as usually do, and in this case will reinforce the inducer field.

Do you think that this idea may be right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 17, 2013, 03:39:54 PM
Hanon
  Answer "no.
 
 Here is the Tesla version as was pointed out to you by another person in this thread.Pat 382282
 Disect it ,read between the lines. Examine the images closely,follow the paths.Mark out the fields. Look for the obvious nonsensical portions of the image. Take the time to view the second image until you can come back and tell me what part does not make any sense. When you locate the part you will see how to and how to get a over unity device through the pat office. It really makes no difference who invented first.Everything follows secondary to who first discovered the load stone and the voltiac cell.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 17, 2013, 04:08:23 PM
Yes, it's interesting especially because many motor-generator OU devices have been already shown on youtube. And we can do it without moving parts today....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 17, 2013, 05:03:59 PM
Forest has eyes to see with and knows how to use them.

I guess you always found all the easter eggs as a kid. Revealed the deception of the magic tricks at parties. It's a real hoot Tesla got this through the examiners. Just goes to show you no mater how smart you think you are your still just human.

 Wow it wont let me put the image on here. Oh well ,just look close at the second image of the patent. K K ,K' K'  are actually K and K'.  The doubling up of the K's was to confound the examiner.
  lol  Tricky wrabbit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 17, 2013, 06:54:34 PM
Hanon
  Answer "no.
 
 Here is the Tesla version as was pointed out to you by another person in this thread.Pat 382282
 Disect it ,read between the lines. Examine the images closely,follow the paths.Mark out the fields. Look for the obvious nonsensical portions of the image. Take the time to view the second image until you can come back and tell me what part does not make any sense. When you locate the part you will see how to and how to get a over unity device through the pat office. It really makes no difference who invented first.Everything follows secondary to who first discovered the load stone and the voltiac cell.

I don´t know why some people in these forums say to be sure of knowing the key concept for running a OU device. All they say: "I am not going to tell it, just look for it into Tesla´s patents", but none say what to look for exactly nor they explain in it in a clearly way. At least explain your ideas Clearly and with graphichs as has been done by other users

As far as I know Tesla did not try to patent any OU device, he just patented his AC polyphase system. Are you sure that something else is hidden into that exact patent? Are you sure that thse extra info is related to the design done by Figuera?

I am not an expert into electromagnetism. I have mainly learnt all in this last year since I am involved around the Figuera´s generator. I will try to read and understand that patent. I will do my best but I am not sure of grasping those sutile details...which are between the lines as you state... just with my current electromagnetic expertise.

Regards and thanks for sharing
Title: Induction by "flux cutting" or by "flux linking"
Post by: hanon on November 17, 2013, 07:44:35 PM
Richard Feynman (Nobel prize winner) about the electromagnetic induction:

    "So the "flux rule" that the emf in a circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit applies whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the circuit moves (or both) ...

    Yet in our explanation of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases  E = v x B  for "circuit moves" and  E = -S· dB/dt  for "field changes".

    We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena.

...

The "flux rule" does not work in this case [note: for an example explained in the original text]. It must be applied to circuits in which the material of the circuit remains the same. When the material of the circuit is changing, we must return to the basic laws. The correct physics is always given by the two basic laws

F = q · ( E + v · B )
rot E = - dB/dt                              "

            — Richard P. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

--------------------------------------------

For those interested in a interesting fact about the Induction Law here I link a file which explains that two different formulations seem to exist for the same phenomenon : one, the Faraday Unipolar generator: E = (v · B) , other the Maxwell 2nd Law : rot E = -dB/dt, which are two different formulations for the same law !!! Faraday-or-Maxwell by Meyl (http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Faraday-or-Maxwell.pdf) (read page 5 and next)

http://imageshack.us/a/img826/2978/gzuy.jpg (http://imageshack.us/a/img826/2978/gzuy.jpg)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 17, 2013, 09:01:16 PM
I'm guessing here but the transformer case is incorect.  Why ? Because if the resulting is decoupled E and B then it's against my interpretation of electricity. There is no such thing as a wave with only one side.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 18, 2013, 06:41:47 PM
Also there are two different manifestations of Lenz Law:

1- Lenz Law derived from a flux linking two coils
: It will create a opposing magnetic field (Binduced) against the change in the original magnetic field


2- Lenz Law derived from a flux cutting the moving wire
: it will appear a dragging force (F_b) which oppose the movement.

A proof of this dragging force can be seen here in a coil perpendicular to the inducer field: Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHCwgc_xs3s)

Therefore: even in a coil at right angle to the inducer field we will get a dragging effect, although we can skip the opposing magnetic field. But we still have the dragging force against the movement..

Maybe the idea behind Figuera devices was to move the flux lines to cut the wire instead of moving the wire to cut the flux lines. This way you could skip both the opposing magnetic field and the dragging force. I don´t know. I am still learning ...   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 18, 2013, 07:16:27 PM
Two wave producers super imposed offset by 90 degrees or overlapped. Independently reaching saturation to retard current independently sharing a single source but also controlled independently. I tried to copy paste the image from the telsa patent for two reasons. One it shows how he found a way around the patent examiners which is amusing. Second it shows better detail. If i were more sure of your historical exposure I would have just alluded to the theory of a double acting steam piston engine.
 The inducers are pushing the induced by pushing back and forth against each other they only need enough current to maintain their respective feilds.The point between two opposing fields consumes no power but is the same direction of each other (NN) (SS) so direct linking magnetically is impossible between the inducers.Preventing the activity associated with transformers. If you place any two independent magnets north to south they combine into a single magnet.No good .If you do the same with any two electromagnets you get the same. Then the interception with a secondary or induced follows normal transformer rules, at the expense of supply current. Which has no advantage. Im not big on wasting my time with drawing pictures that already exists.If I were paid to do so I would, maybe actually no I would'nt. I gave you a clear image of two magnets facing each other and the field is clearly seen using iron filings. You can see the way each of the field flow with a distinct shear point between them where all the magnetic lines of force are squashed together in a fraction of the space they normally resided in. How many times have people drawn up something which acts like a normal transformer and got zilch for results. Do you really expect those lemons to give up chocolate milk?Really? Want to toss some formulas into the air showing a singular field? Im sure it is quite accurate but no more relative then the lemon is to cocoa bean. Find a formula to show two seperate fields which alternate in strength never using more then either one at full saturation because the current is adjusted from one electromagnet to the other in part and in succession never going to zero power on either.So in theory you only need calculate one electro magnet at full saturation for one. Then find a formula to give the quality of the magnetic field and it's potential reaction on a secondary or induced winding on a second core in close proximity. What could come out of the induced based on the quality of the inducers field is not at the expense of the inducers or the current which produced the field because you did not link the inducer fields to each other to make a complete path between them they are kept independent of each other. Only the space between the two opposing fields with its shear point and line of seperation is moving to and fro. The difference between these two fields which flow opposite directions (that is to say they still flow N-S but when facing each other N-N it will be seen as opposite flows of flux) it is twice as great as a single field changing direction back and forth.  Im sure you know of or have had some one explain or ask the question" If a south bound train traveling 60 miles an hour runs into a train going north bound at 80 miles an hour what is the speed of impact?" It's not 80 nor 60, it's 140. Consider further will a train consume more fuel going 140mph compared to two which are going one at 60 and one at 80? Lots of variables come into play. trains being pretty far from two magnetic fields pushing against each other .The connection is little more then to help you think in terms of opposition not cooperation of fields.
   Now you speak of a single half wave, I have no idea how you got that.Its far from that.Next you will be jumping ahead to two D cores with a single link between them powered by primaries seperately. Thats not the same thing either. You would still be working off transformer rules by permanently linking all the fields. They cant very well push each other around if they are combining into one.Then the only way to push it around is to use a lot power getting it to reverse direction 50 or 60 times a second.
 Another way of looking at it: Take a pipe and place a balloon on each end.Imagine you have placed a portion of air into the pipe enough to make the balloons taught but not expanded. Then imagine you can get a solid piston inside the center of the pipe. If you were some how able to move the piston to one side you would push more air into that side and the balloon would expand while the other emptied. Then push the piston back the other way and other balloon will fill while the opposite empties. You have not changed the volume of air in the set up you just moved it more to one side then the to the other side with the piston. Now what if it was the air that was pushing the piston back and forth by squeezing the balloons one at a time? Still the volume of air remains the same while the piston moves back and forth. Replace the balloons with inducers and replace the piston with the induced. Think of the air as the magnetic field with a point of seperation between the two sides because they are naturally repulsive to each other.
  In the first model the volume of air is static ,it does not change in volume it just gets squeezed back and forth. In the electrical model the electro magnets will not take on much more current then it takes to reach saturation. Once optimal conditions are reached in the quantity and quality of saturation in the cores of the opposed inducers (NN) (SS) they are squeezed more or less to move the field seperation between them so the fields move back and forth between them like the air and piston in the air model. The induced sees a changing magnetic flux but little was required to keep the inducers flux intact after it was made initially because it thinks it is saturated. Between two inducers in total, the amount of maximum flux for one of the inducers is shifted back and forth between the two. These two inducers think they are nearly saturated all the time. Because as the field becomes more in one compared to the other one occupying more flux space then the other even trying to over take some of the core of the other but it cant because two north or two south cant be in the same place at the same time reducing the effective mass of the lesser as seen by its own field. They can be a little closer or further apart depending on strength giving rise to movement between them.
 I know some people think you can only generate current if a magnet passes all the way through a coil so both north and south poles are involved. Seems kind of counter intuitive since they pass one at a time and cause a reverse effect of each other on a conductor which still has nothing to do with anything since the inducers are facing opposing directions only to prevent direct inductive coupling to each other while still getting a change in a specified location of induction between them for the induced. Truthfully I dont think your going to be able to come with a formula that will be complete enough to be of much use in terms of output due to the complexity of the cores and materials coupled with an inverse motion of induction by seperation. Don't look for me to do it any time soon for you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 18, 2013, 09:52:22 PM
How nice of you to offer up a graphic.
(http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/129975/image//)
 On either side of the induced coil place a mirror image of the magnet (N N) Move the coil left and right in the space between the magnetic fields. So the coil is either completely in one of the two fields. Move the coil back and forth. The induced coil sees a field of opposite direction of flow as it passes from one to the other. To maintain the magnetic field requires little expenditure since it is not reversing magnetic direction. The magnetic field needs to change in strength opposite it's counter inducer magnet for stationary model.So as to shift which magnets field is covering up the induced. These models or images and formulas only account for a single magnetic field and sometimes a cooperating set of magnets.Not opposing magnets, so the formula given will not apply. You need to know how much current it takes to maintain the magnetic field of the magnet then split that between two magnets then move potential or current more to one and less to the other and vise versa in succession at the frequency your looking for. If you combine the flux into a single path so they join you will have nothing worth noting.Just another POS transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 19, 2013, 01:24:37 AM
Two wave producers super imposed offset by 90 degrees or overlapped. Independently reaching saturation to retard current independently sharing a single source but also controlled independently. I tried to copy paste the image from the telsa patent for two reasons. One it shows how he found a way around the patent examiners which is amusing. Second it shows better detail. If i were more sure of your historical exposure I would have just alluded to the theory of a double acting steam piston engine.
 The inducers are pushing the induced by pushing back and forth against each other they only need enough current to maintain their respective feilds.The point between two opposing fields consumes no power but is the same direction of each other (NN) (SS) so direct linking magnetically is impossible between the inducers.

Thanks Doug for your long explanation. Your post are very dense and difficult to dissect. It is a pity that you don´t use schematics to make easier the interpretation (you know what it is said that an image is worth more than 1000 words)

Here I just post a sketch that represent your idea. Two like poles facing each other and swinging back and forth along the changes in intensity in the electromagnets

As you can see in this scheme there is induction by:

    1-  Induction by Flux linking along the part of each coil transversed by the flux lines
    2-  Induction by Flux cutting the induced wire

The key that in this scheme is that the flux cutting induction to be greater than the induction the induction by flux linking. (the flux linking induction is under the Lenz Law effect and will produce an opposing induced magnetic field which will reduce the inducers strength)

The good part of this idea is that if the flux cutting induction by an N-N configuration will induce in the sense to reduce the inducers field, then the S-S configuration will do it in the sense to increase it because the flux lines in each case have opposite direction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 19, 2013, 01:19:53 PM
I do believe he's got it. ;D The only way to conserve input is just that. conserve it by not directly coupling the magnetic effects to the output constantly while still getting the change in flux in the induced. Two magnets with an effect on time of 1/4 of the time each= 50 percent used to operate induction at 100 percent the decline is free. I think you'll find reminance can be your friend along with Lenz law if you have enough realistate to keep everyone happy.Now you can think about geometry of pole faces to even out things and the hour glass shape of the core pieces to consintrate force and reduce wire. The electric motor in the home of Mr ya know who,that was not a novelty. It lags and lagging reflective power keeps all the lights from knocking the entire works out of time. The motor is a must have just let it run under no load. Might work better with a weight to function as a fly wheel if too small a motor is used. May even have to start the motor turning by hand if proportions are out of wack.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 21, 2013, 06:45:53 PM
Doug,
 
I have been studying the Tesla patent No. 382282 that you referred previously and I cannot see the similarity with the system with like poles facing each other. Where is the idea in common in both designs?
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2013, 12:18:21 AM
That's ok hanon   
  What do you see out of the ordinary?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 22, 2013, 09:02:12 AM
btw what is "multiple arc" connection ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2013, 01:01:21 PM
Arc was a type o , ac connection.
  examine the generator closer KK K'K' the gen has two field magnets it;s simple ac generator so why the four slip rings and brushes? Trace out the connections to the annular ring.
  What will be the hard part is to get the fields centered so that the exact place where they reside in the induced is evenly positioned amongst all the sets so when current is shifted between the inducers it happens at the same time with the same amount. A method to test the field strength of each inducer while in place needs to be established. Any difference of sets will counter the effect in the other sets.every electromagnet of the inducers has to be exactly the same in strength and volume. If you have more volume of iron core or wire in half it wont react evenly on that part of the cycle.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 22, 2013, 09:37:37 PM
Doug1


So you state there is something interesting with generator , hmm I was surpriced by two brush pairs but text explains that he took two ac waves each from separate coil of generator.There is no K and K` , only K.


What was very strange to me is the connection of load to the shunted coil ! Trace it please, Tesla even state it has more current into load. That is not series or parallel connection I'm aware of.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on November 23, 2013, 05:30:18 AM
Here is a picture saying what I think he did. Everything to the left of the dashed vertical line is what he patented or made claims on. What he left out of the patent as many say "something is always left out" would be everything to the right of the dashed vertical line.



Forest, Multiple arc simply means "In parallel". The coil and leads represent an "arc" and multiplying them is putting them in parallel (Multiple Arc) while series connecting them is putting them in a string.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 23, 2013, 10:07:05 AM
Farmhand,, yes it's parallel but I never thought about it such way. Essentially when we have a load connected to two or more coils then those coils are shunted by each others...interesting....it's just a new look
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on November 23, 2013, 10:39:29 AM
Yeah Forest, exactly.  :) But we still must be careful to connect them together so as to reinforce each other not with opposite polarities while in phase, kinda thing i think. I'm fairly sure you know what I mean and already understood that, but it is good to say so others might pick up on it.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 27, 2013, 10:31:19 AM
Arc was a type o , ac connection.
  examine the generator closer KK K'K' the gen has two field magnets it;s simple ac generator so why the four slip rings and brushes? Trace out the connections to the annular ring.
  What will be the hard part is to get the fields centered so that the exact place where they reside in the induced is evenly positioned amongst all the sets so when current is shifted between the inducers it happens at the same time with the same amount. A method to test the field strength of each inducer while in place needs to be established. Any difference of sets will counter the effect in the other sets.every electromagnet of the inducers has to be exactly the same in strength and volume. If you have more volume of iron core or wire in half it wont react evenly on that part of the cycle.

Hi,
 
Then you mean that the connections in the annular ring will reach to a like poles facing each other situation. Is this what you are trying to say?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 01, 2013, 05:55:37 PM
Yes, read page two very carefully of Teslas patent. The generator has two coils on the armeture and two magnets either elctro or perm magnets. The two coils are connected to four flip rings. Making two connections to each side of the generator windings. He is splitting each into two. Then off to his ring converter where they are 90 degrees out in one respect but not in the other by way of the second set of connections. The line of greatest effect whirled about. He says "a line" not a square not a rectangle not a field not an egg, a line. The line is where two like poles repel each other. The line is very thin but it contains the volume of both sets of field lines in a small space which can not become mutually interactive with each other except to shift the line in one direction or the other by virtue of the strength of the magnets being controlled. The direction of magnetic flow for each inducer field is in opposite direction of the other. As soon as the line is crossed or the line crosses the induced the field is 180 degrees reversed from the perspective of the induced. How much quicker do you think it would be to move a fine line between two n facing poles a quarter of an inch back and forth compared to completely reversing the poles in a magnetic core. Think about the energy it takes to reverse those poles compared to shifting them slightly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 05, 2013, 07:04:14 AM
Y'all might be ALOT smarter than me, I've heard alot of good stuff around here, but as usual, you hear some bullie types, you hear some jokes, and you hear some truth. It works better if there is alot of truth, some jokes and NO bullies. IMHO. WE need to help everyone to help ourselves.
True or not? ;D

PS: Please remember that not all of us have a Doctorits Degree or what ever the GOV says is required to do or understand this stuff, we like to do it for fun and to help others, EXCEPT FOR THE ONES THAT ARE ONLY!!!! AFTER  PROFIT
!!! ANY AND ALL POLICTICALS!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 07, 2013, 01:38:42 PM
You have to go back to the basics often to keep your thoughts aligned with certain basic rules. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html
 The device is magnetic without the use of a driving force such as a engine or other brute force mechanism to turn a stationary magnetic field (rotor) inside of a stator.
 The explanation of what makes a magnet stronger and how does a lever and leverage function to do work should not have to be defined to people who have the capacity to use a computer. 
  On the other hand. maybe what makes a magnet stronger is missleading or not entirely complete as it should be. Number of turns of a coil N seams to be often locked up into some notion that the turns have to be from a single conductor. A long single conductor leads to higher Ir resistance and losses from heating. no where in any definition does it state turns or loops have to come from a single conductor. Resistance is measure of the length of a conductor/s, number of turns is not always dependant on a single length of conductor. The basic purpose of dividing cores into thin plates to reduce eddy currents into smaller discrete portions is a form of leveraging forces. No one ever said you cant apply the same thing to your coils to make a stronger magnet from a lesser power source. Even a POS trafo is a leverage, works exactly the same way even from the point of view of isolation.
 There is a lot of stuff out there easily found but even more easily over looked. Look hard enough you might even figure out your coils need a perticular angle on a core to get the most out of them.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 07, 2013, 06:43:49 PM
You have to go back to the basics often to keep your thoughts aligned with certain basic rules. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html (http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html)
 The device is magnetic without the use of a driving force such as a engine or other brute force mechanism to turn a stationary magnetic field (rotor) inside of a stator.
 The explanation of what makes a magnet stronger and how does a lever and leverage function to do work should not have to be defined to people who have the capacity to use a computer. 
  On the other hand. maybe what makes a magnet stronger is missleading or not entirely complete as it should be. Number of turns of a coil N seams to be often locked up into some notion that the turns have to be from a single conductor. A long single conductor leads to higher Ir resistance and losses from heating. no where in any definition does it state turns or loops have to come from a single conductor. Resistance is measure of the length of a conductor/s, number of turns is not always dependant on a single length of conductor. The basic purpose of dividing cores into thin plates to reduce eddy currents into smaller discrete portions is a form of leveraging forces. No one ever said you cant apply the same thing to your coils to make a stronger magnet from a lesser power source. Even a POS trafo is a leverage, works exactly the same way even from the point of view of isolation.
 There is a lot of stuff out there easily found but even more easily over looked. Look hard enough you might even figure out your coils need a perticular angle on a core to get the most out of them.


Ah Doug1, if I could have Litz wire..... check the same turns coil inductance please somebody can do video ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 07, 2013, 07:59:20 PM
Litz wire is too expensive. Rough off the hip backwards estimate. 10,000 watts 120 volts AC is 84 amps roughly. Half the volts to be dual dc opposing magnets 60 volt dc, even to take that to a set of 5 being 12 volts each magnet they would have to handle continuous with out over heating at the maximum time the maximum load was expected to run. 12 volts 84 amps 60 percent duty cycle per inducer magnet.
  I can bundle my own and use welding cable specs to cross ref. the ampacity rating for the stranded bundle under constant load. There are formulas to figure out the magnet core specs. Im no math wiz but I will suffer through it. Old texts as I remember used to recommend keeping the lines of flux down to 7000 per cm squared. Using two independent magnets opposing each other the induced is going to encounter a potential difference of magnetic change equal to 14000 lines per cm if it were linear from a single magnets field alternating. The number of inducers can be added to or subtracted as needed to stay below the point of generating waste heat. The return to the original, while Mr figurara does not explain how to use batteries and alternating currents in combination to behave as diodes and amplifiers we can always to fall back old Mr faith full for some detailed explanations and drawings on how to. That would be How to get dc currents from ac currents with out rectifiers or commutators or diodes or tubes. If components fit then there you go. Grab your bucket of flowers and storm that machine gun nest.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 08, 2013, 08:12:23 PM
¿Vamos a tener un dispositivo de auto-ejecución hasta navidad???????????
Después de tantas teorías y tantas discusiones sería un gran regalo de Navidad, todos están de acuerdo ...

Estoy preguntando, no afirmando ok.

Feliz Navidad.

Are we going to have a self-run device until Christmas???????????
After so many theories and so many discussions, it would be a great Christmas gift, all agree...

I'm asking, not saying ok.

Merry Christmas.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 09, 2013, 01:08:54 AM
you might even figure out your coils need a particular angle on a core to get the most out of them.

Hi Doug,

I am intriged with this sentence. I could have expected a particular shape to improve the output, but not a particular angle in the coil. Could you define your proposal? I don't get to understand it.

Another question: who is Mr. faith?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 09, 2013, 04:39:31 PM
Tesla is old faithful,there is lot I dont care for about him but he has taken the time and expense to leave behind a great deal of patents to use for educational purposes.
  The angle of wind is just that. The winding as a coil around a core. Sometimes you see coils wound layer after layer with a single conductor back and forth. That method may increase dilectric capacitance inbetween layers but it has to cancel out some of the inductive action. A coil with a slight slant where the winds when considered to be a advancing path around an object partially fall behind on any given portion of the path. At no point would going backwards help to advance anything.Layers of winds should be single layers with terminations at the ends of the start and stop length along the core or bobbin tied together at the ends of each layer. There is nothing  in stone that says each layer has to be of the same wire diameter. Fields weaken as the get further away. Take every advantage. If your winding is around a 1 inch thick trafo "I" section and the coil is 1 inch thick and 1 long the field around the core piece is not going to be rectangular shape that follows the shape of the core. It becomes a shape more like a foot ball.Fewer lines of force or lines that are more spread out in the middle. There will be less induction possible for a given wire size at the places where the lines of force are spread out more. Not that you would intercept it there. If you inclined to try to keep the lines of force more straight and less bowed out in the middle you need to think about why they bowed out in the first place. The windings generating a magnetic field sit over the core. The direction of spin around the windings is in one direction close to the core on the inside of the winding. It's the opposite on the outside of the winding. As the flux created in the core has to complete its path it has to jump over the flux on the outside of the winding which is now going the opposite direction. If the core is hour glass shaped the windings are not only shorter in wire length for the same number of turns the flux is kept in a smaller space and will less effect nearby coils.Less wire ,less core material wasted. Wider pole faces will spread out the number of lines per cm squared and produce less heating on the pole faces if your operating above a excessive level of saturation.In a non moving design, one that does not rotate the rotor piece the heating if it were to happen would be evenly distributed unlike one that does rotate. In a revolving system the heat produced is on the leading or lagging edge of the pole face depending on different factors caused by leading or lagging loads.
  It would be better to just not have a lot of heat develop in the first place but it may not be possible to completely stop that from happening.

  Will ya have a working model before Christmas? I wouldn't bet a plumb nickle on that.Besides time is not important. Rushing causes misstakes that is why I have spent weeks unwinding with greatest care 25lbs of wire from a core I miss calculated. I could go the route of a mini model but i dont trust that everything will work correctly when scaling up. It become far too complicated to think of everything that has to be considered when scaling up. To truly be able to scale down you have to have a way to scale down the size of the magnetic domains in the core material not just use smaller pieces of normal material that reduce the number of domains. Since it will in the end have to be baked to keep the torq on the windings at bay and the volume of materials are not cheap. The time put in if spare time is used which would otherwise be wasted on things that are pointless is instead used to build this.Then time is what is less important. Im in no hurry to see how many mistakes can be made.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 12, 2013, 12:47:49 AM
Hi all,

There is a spanish patent about a overunity generator filed in 1955 by David Hogan and carlos Ludovik Jakovlewich (patent ES225316) which is curiously very very similar to the Figuera patent No. 303376 , the one with the rotary drum coil.  In this patent the coil is stationary and the magnets are mounted over some rotating discs.

I have translated the claims of this patent:


---------------------
CLAIMS SPANISH PATENT ES225316

The authors claim in this patent:

1) New electric generator characterized by the existence of series of discs, variable in number and in dimension, susceptible to host "magnets".

2) New electric generator according to claim 1 characterized in that the series of discs are mounted on a shaft in parallel arrangement ; the shaft rests on its sides over bearings. This arrangement of supporting bearings allow its intermediate extension if required.

3 ) New electric generator according to claims 1 and 2,wherein the " magnets " located in the discs must be placed parallely on the shaft. These discs, spaced, will allow that the poles of the magnets ( magnetos) of each disk are facing " north-south " (opposition of poles).

4) New electric generator according to claims 1 to 3, characterized in that between the discs (series of two) a stationary or fixed screen or sieve (grids) of copper wire or any electroconductive material glazed and covered with insulation is placed.

----------------------------------
In the description it is clearly stated that the authors are describing an overunity generator where a part of the energy produced could be used to power the machine and the rest could be used externally for other uses.

Any comments?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 18, 2013, 11:49:53 PM
Hi all,
 
 This is how I think that this patent may work fine. This is a modification to solve the problem of cancelling the opposite effect in each side of the coil in the original drawing (IMO). The winding could be a type of classical drum winding which crosses the center point diametrically and surround two discs inside (see photo below).

In my oppinion the key is :

      1. A coil perpendicular to the inducer magnetic field. With this configuration the induced magnetic field will not oppose to the inducer field. There won´t be any opposing field against the magnets.
 
      2. Static wires and moving magnets. With this configuration the wires, being static, will not suffer any dragging force. The dragging force just appears in the wires -where the current is flowing. If the wires are the static part then this problem is skipped, IMO. (The dragging force is calculated as the Lorentz force, F=Intensity•Length•B , and this force just appears in systems with electrical charges in movement. If  we place the current into an static part, then -I think- we won´t have this dragging force which usually opposes the movement)

Therefore there won´t be any opposing field neither any dragging force in the wires.
 
 Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 19, 2013, 09:54:13 PM
This geneator if off-topic in this thread. The objetive was to compare it with the Figuera patent No. 30376 with the rotary winding, which share some features with this device

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)


Title: May The Force Be With You. May The Force Assist You
Post by: hanon on December 19, 2013, 10:11:21 PM
For deep study:
 
 I think I have discovered a new configuration which may get OU finally. I want to share with you that in a configuration with like poles facing each other the induced magnetic field will not act against the inducer field (as usual) but it seems to reinforce the inducer field in the electromagnet which is increasing in strenght at that moment. In other words: the induction take place to ASSIST the inducer field, not to reduce it, as usually happens in the Lenz effect.

The important idea is to note that induction can take place as consecuence of two different phenomena:

1- Induction by flux cutting the induced wire: This induction is done by the lines of field cutting the wires. This motional emf usually creates a dragging force which acts against the movement. As this is a motionless device there won´t be any dragging force.

E_cut = B·v·Length·sin(Theta)

2- Induction by flux linking two coils
: This induction is done by the flux linking two coils. This induction does not need to cut the wires (as happens in transformers). It will create a induced magnetic field that will tend to oppose to the change in the inducer field.

E_link = A·dB/dt

In order to emulate a movable generator into a motionless device it is necessary that the magnetic flux lines cut the induced wires. Therefore we should maximize the induction by flux cutting and minimize the induction by flux linking.

 Like poles facing each other: By changing the magnetic strength in both electromagnets (excited with the two opposite signals) the lines of force will repel and will leave the induction iron core. The sequential change in both currents will create a swing of the lines of force back and forth in each cycle, cutting the induced wires which surround the induced core.
 
 The features that will require this configuration are:

 Feature 1. Two north poles facing each other N-N in the electromagnets: With this set-up the magnetic field lines will leave the core inside-out. (Maybe two south poles will also work fine. I have just studied the N-N configuration)
 
 Feature 2. Excite with two opposite signals each electromagnet . It will achieve a  relative movement of the flux lines cutting the wire back and forth along the whole coil length from side (pole) to side (pole) (that we will name as coil thickness). One magnetic field is increasing and other magnetic field is decreasing, therefore no change in magnetic pressure between them will be created during this swinging motion.
 
 Feature 3. A rectangular shape in the electromagnets an in the induced coil in order to maximize the flux cutting induction and minimize the flux linking induction. The ratio of both effects will be increased with high values of the induced core perimeter and low values of coil area. This is a new feature which is fundamental for a optimized induction.
 
 ( E_cut / E_link ) = ( Coil_Perimeter · Coil_thickness) / Coil_Area

 
 Note that the flux linking induction is produced in the part of the coil linked by the inducer flux lines. This induction will produce a counter induced field (as usual). Therefore it is needed to minimize this flux linking effect. We need a ratio E_cut/E_link > 1  because the induction by flux cutting will be the one that won´t produce an opposite Lenz effect because this is a motionless device.
 

 Feature 4. As the flux cutting induction just happens in the zone where the lines are expelled from the core then we need that each turn will be cut during all the time. Therefore, it will be better to wind the induced coil with a tape instead of a wire (the tape must cover the whole coil thickness from side to side). With a tape all the turns will be cut all the time by the flux lines coming out the core. This will not happen with common wires. Tape winding will maximize the flux cutting induction and will minimize the induction by flux linking. I think that tape winding is mandatory for achieving a ratio well over 1.

 Conclusion: With this new features I think that this generator will be able to get a much higher induced current than the current used to excite the device. The Lenz effect in this configuration will reinforce (assist) the inducer field which is increasing at that moment in the corresponding electromagnet. This configuration will get the Lenz effect working to make a stronger field instead of making a weaker field, as normally happens.
 
 Please share your comments and ideas, and tell me if I have made any mistake in this reasoning.
 
 Regards,
 
 Hanon
 
 
 ANNEX  -  Equations
 
 
 E_cut= B·v·Length = B·v·N·Coil_perimeter
 
 v=Space/Time = Coil_Thickness/(1/2·Period)= Coil_Thickness·2·Frequency
 
 B=B1+B2 = constant =Bmax
 
 Frequency =1 / Period
 
 E_cut= Bmax·Coil_Thickness·2·Frequency·N·Coil_perimeter
 --------------
 
 E_link =N·Area·dB/dt
 
 dB/dt =(Bmax - Bmin)/(1/2·Period) = Bmax·2·Frequency
 
 E_link =Bmax·2·Frequency·Area·N
 ---------------
 
 E_total =E_cut - E_link = Bmax·2·Frequency·N·(Coil_Thickness·Coil_Perimeter - Area)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 20, 2013, 09:51:53 AM
Now your getting somewhere Hanon. The tesla version uses ac.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 20, 2013, 09:59:41 AM
Side note,your second page showing the signal of the two inducers, some people will only view it from the output of the induced. IE the signals are in reality above the zero line from the view of current but sinusodal from the aspect of effect on the induced. Good luck trying to keep that straight in any conversation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 20, 2013, 04:46:09 PM
@hanon

Only one question.
What is the phase of the input signals?
If it is 90 degrees in the machine Figuera, does not work. Try to see.
If it is 180 degrees, nothing changes. It is exactly the operation of the machine Figuera.
If 0 degrees, how do you propose will create a standing wave, you will have a gain, while the system is tuned but with a nonlinear load will not work very well.  :(
My question is, how do you go the junction of overlapping fields (> | <) to move from one side to another?
See, my question is for Figuera 1908 machine, and not to other patents. Before that, "Tesla's experts" appear explaining details.  ;D  :-X

Merry Christmas
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 20, 2013, 07:12:32 PM
Hi,

The key is not thinking of phase... nor in creating standing waves... Both signals must operate in counterforce, when one increases the other decreases and the reverse, when the second increases the first decreases in magnetic strength. Make a test, join your palms and put then in front of you, now push more with the right one and less with the left one. The contact point should have moved to one side. Now make the opposite, push more with the left palm and less with the right one.

As you should note you are swinging your palms from one side to the other with very few effort if you do it rhythmically. The device works the same but with magnetic strength in each electromagnets to move the point where the lines of field are expelled from the core.

Both signals must be in opposition, and as remarked by Doug they must be always positive to avoid switching the poles.

Regards and merry Christmas !!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 20, 2013, 09:14:30 PM
Hi,

The key is not thinking of phase... nor in creating standing waves...

If I can't think of "phase", in which I'm going to think?
We're talking about physics and electronics here, no?
The 1908 machine, is an induction machine, right?
She has the behavior of a transformer, right?
She needs the induced field varies in order to work, right?
For the induced field vary he needs the electrical current varies, right?
If the electrical current varies, she creates a wave, right?
This wave at any given instant in time, has a "phase", right? or am I wrong?  :-[

Regards!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 21, 2013, 12:15:57 PM
Some aclarations about the pole orientation and the rectangular shape:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-24.html#post247198 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-24.html#post247198)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 21, 2013, 02:07:36 PM
The internet is not the easiest way to communicate is it.lol
 Here is a drawn trace of all three coils in time. Im not a big fan of scopes hard to use a two dimensional image of three dimensional activity. This sort of what your looking for.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 21, 2013, 03:45:36 PM
The advantage is in the method of using the current to make a strong field and not asking the field to reverse polarity.Only to reduce in strength. There is only one source current which is shared by two inducers. Each inducer is controlled in two ways.The amount of current going to it and the time.

 Tesla's model is doing the same thing with the source being ac.

 What makes a electro magnet stronger? More wire turns,more current,better material. Current costs money for ever.More you use and or the longer you use it the more you pay. More current is not a good way to make a stronger magnet.
  The number of turns of wire results in a longer wire with higher losses. Who told you to use one wire? If they ment to say a longer wire or that length of wire was important part they would have come out and said that plain as day. What it says is more turns "N". More copper cost more money to but only once. When you have a long length of wire and it laps back and forth don't you expect the field around each wire to continue to act as it should? There are a lot of things I don't understand but i dont think going the opposite direction of what I want to go in will get me to a place very soon.
  Take a look at some battery operated lift magnets (http://www.magnetoolinc.com/magnetic-tools/battery-operated-lifting-magnets.php). Up to 11,000 lbs from a 12 volt battery. you have to scroll down the page to find the spec sheet. Now if you had two of these facing each other with a induction coil between them and rotated the current form one to the other and back so one is getting a little voltage say 3 or 4 volts while the other is at 8volt and smoothly reduce the 8 volt one while increasing the the lower one the point between the fields would shift back and forth. The flux of each pushing against the other the entire time. The two separate flux paths being opposing have a total potential difference of a single magnet being on at a full 12v at all times. The induced coil will react as if you were cutting the lines with rotation in a magnetic field that has 11,000 pounds of lift. while less practical and expensive to use two of these this way it's just to give you the image in your head hopefully. Subdividing this into several smaller magnets enables the induced coils to be wired up in series to reach a useful voltage.
 A wave yes, a cyclic wave no. Reversing magnetic domains wastes too much energy. Can you imagine getting your fingers between two of those magnets set up to attract each other? That would be a bad day.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 21, 2013, 05:07:03 PM
Thanks Doug for your comment and sketch. Your analogy with two strong electromagnets is very interesting: how a 12 V battery may lift heavy weights. I still don´t get why you say to use more turns "N"  not in a conventional way. Are you refering to a torus electromagnet? Anyway, maybe it is a just a optimization. By now I would be happy in having a working unit. Optimization will come later.

 I have here another picture for Schiko in order to explain how the two opposite signals are.

Note that it is important to change the field intensity but you don´t need to reverse polarity. Maybe even it is mandatory to avoid reversing polarity, I am not sure. Therefore the opposite signals must be always above zero voltage.

Regards and merry Christmas!!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 22, 2013, 11:36:14 AM
 The number of times the wire turns a turn round a core the greater number of linked flux paths it makes the magnetic field stronger. The length of wire adds resistance with length. The thinner the wire the worse it gets so keeping conductor length short and keeping turns count high can only be done with more conductors. Much more then a few. So that a very small current can make a much stronger magnetic field. Picture it like this, if I can determine the length of conductor based on it's resistance alone for example if 5 ft has nearly no Ir loss but after 5 ft it starts to climb up. Then I would limit the conductor length to 5 ft each. I find I need 3000 turns to reach a maximum flux density in my core at 12 volts. I have to take as many 5 ft lengths of conductor as it takes to make in total 3000 turns. Then I have to decide the best way to wind it or construct the core so I can wind it. There are lots of ways to wind it but what sticks in my head is that little phrase 'those skilled in the art of". Show me a working unit and I will bet that person is the one who is skilled. It's not the inventors problem if you lack the needed skills.
 Slapping on a birds nest of wire on a stick is not a skill except for the sake of argument.
 The amount of preasure between the inducer magnets is not known. Two magnets facing each other with the same sign pole faces will exert repelling force. What if it turns out to require hundreds of pounds of force to be maintained as the two fluxes move back and forth in the space of the induced? or thousands of pounds of force? How will you choose to make your magnet stronger? You can always make it weeker by reducing current if it is too strong nut after you wind it there is only one way left to increase it.More current.
  The drawn wave image I left you was to show all three coils/inducers and induced. The induced is the coil of the three which reaches below zero and into the negative side of the scale.

  Im going to have to send this part before the storm knocks out the power. At least I wont have to start over from scratch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 22, 2013, 05:31:04 PM
Forgot to answer this "    I still don´t get why you say to use more turns "N"  not in a conventional way. Are you refering to a torus electromagnet?"

   Any electro magnet.

Convention is ruled by economics. They have be able to make a lot of something quickly and cheaply in manufacturing. A 100.+ a plate meal does not come in a frozen box from wallwart. It's made to order with quality food. It most likely is not economical to build in a production setting.

  I found there is study of the electromagnetic field and it's effects on living organisms which has been going on for a good 20 yrs. They use field distortion to create large volumes of space that contain a uniform field. Aside from the health interests is the method to make the space large enough to have a meter size uniform flux that small animals or plants can be placed to perform the tests. Worthy of noting that there are some configurations already studied and measured for us to exploit to gain a better understanding of the orientation of the conductor groupings to yield a desired result. The paper I was looking at was more related to the equipment and how to organize a double blind study by using two spaces and a single power supply to operate both units at the same time. One makes a field the other cancels the field . Helmoltz Kirschvink 1992 pdf. (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lepp.cornell.edu%2F~critten%2Fcesrta%2Fecloud%2Fdoc%2FHelmholtz_Kirschvink_1992.pdf&ei=zw-3UpiQLaPuyAHD2oHgAw&usg=AFQjCNExQeOzeKH_Ax2wo7Qq2de0y4u3DQ&bvm=bv.58187178,d.aWc)
  Im contemplating there may be use in finding a way to concentrate the field to avoid leakage and to avoid one inducer completely over taking the opposite one magnetically. In order to prevent the activity of a common transformer where flux traverses the entire set. Once turned on it will be hard to determine if that is happening other then it wont be possible for it to self run. With the number of possible reason for failure it wouldnt hurt to consider some of them may be avoidable while giving some better insight to the type of coil winding required.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 22, 2013, 10:10:47 PM
@ hanon

Yes hanon now you got there !
Remember I built the machine , I know exactly how it works !
Remember also , my objective is to achieve self-running device.  ;D

Essas palavras são para você Hanon! A maquina de 1908 funciona exatamente como eu já coloquei aqui em postagens anteriores, ela funciona como um transformador de PULSOS já que a polaridade dos indutores não é invertida em relação ao induzido e com os pulsos defasados em 180º a transferência de energia é boa o único problema é que para atingir a máxima transferência de energia você tem que manter a frequência dos pulsos sintonizada com a ressonância das bobinas indutoras, se você fizer indutor e induzido na mesma proporção (1:1) o resultado é excelente.
Outra coisa, a maneira que você propõe, os indutores com a mesma face polar (N.N) ou (S.S) também funciona, mas só se você usar pulsos de 0º, ou seja, sinal exatamente igual nos dois indutores o que se torna mais fácil pois você só precisa de um sinal para alimentar os indutores e basta inverter a posição dos indutores em relação ao induzido para que eles fiquem com a mesma face polar apontadas para o mesmo.
Outra coisa importante é que o núcleo tem de ser fechado sobre si mesmo, de outra forma as perdas são muito grandes e a maquina não funciona bem.
O desenho que está na patente, tanto de Sr. Figuera como Buforn é só um esboço e não deve ser seguido ao "pé da letra" é apenas para se compreender os conceitos de funcionamento da maquina.
Espero que esta palavras ajudem na sua incansável busca...

ps:estou construindo um novo protótipo e poderemos discutir tudo que foi dito aqui.
grande abraço! Schiko
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2013, 12:19:23 AM
Hi all,

In order to get this device running we need to use two unphased signals, one in each electromagnet.

I have found a system to generate two 90º unphased signals with a very simple method.

A Thomson Ring (in balance atraction-repsulsion) get in the secondary coil a current 90º unphased respect to  the primary current. Later we can take this signal into a diode bridge to rectify it and feed one electromagnet. We could get a signal identical to the last signals which is drawn in the picture from my previous post

http://sdsu-physics.org/physics180/physics196/Topics/faradaysLaw.html (http://sdsu-physics.org/physics180/physics196/Topics/faradaysLaw.html)

We may get a transformer where the distance between coils could be adjustable in order to regulate the phase shift.

Welding machine: "The intensity control could be done by displacing the coil: It consists on moving away the primary and the secondary"

Link to a paper about the Thomson Ring http://www.journal.lapen.org.mx/march13/3_LAJPE_744_Guido_Pegna_preprint_corr_f.pdf (http://www.journal.lapen.org.mx/march13/3_LAJPE_744_Guido_Pegna_preprint_corr_f.pdf)

Any comments? Please tell me if you think that this method could work properly. Thanks

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 23, 2013, 01:05:54 AM
@hanon
hanon if you insist on phase 90 degrees will not get nowhere.
The transfer of energy is very low when the waves are at 90 degrees.
Again I repeat, we are talking about the 1908 patent.
It's so easy to get two delayed signals for testing ... try!  8)

Regards

ps:you have a scope? if not. I post link program that simulates a scope and signal generator that you can use for your tests.
If you want just talk. is freeware.
and how the machine works at low frequencies will work just fine!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2013, 01:16:28 PM
Hi Schiko,
I am refering to opposite signals.My idea to use a Thomson Ring, 90 phase shift, is related to the last scheme in the previous picture with all kind of signals.

Suppose that you feed the Thomson Ring with AC, you will get a 90° unphased signal. If you later on take both signals into two diodes brigdes you will rectify them into a doble positive wave with a period half of the original period. Both signals will be now 180° unphased (opposite)as the last type of signal drawn in my previous sketch with the signals.

Please tell us the easy way that you use to get the opposite signals. You said time ago you designed a controller to do it. Please share with us. I dont have a signal generator nor an scope nor a pc card. Anyway I am afraid that those outputs are low power outputs. You wont get any resuls in the machine with miliamperes. As I have understood  your device just operate near 100% efficiency. For me this is not a working Figuera unit so you should not say what works and what does not work yet.

I am here just talking as you have said. I am here to discuss and to share. Lately apart from Doug none else is helping actively, what it is really a pity in a device of such a great potential.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2013, 03:20:43 PM
Hi all,

I have collected into a single PDF file my last ideas about an overunity generator as we have been discussing lately.

Regards,
Hanon

Other link to the PDF file:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/ybmdtyn38d3eo5i/PROPOSAL%20FOR%20A%20MOTIONLESS%20OVERUNITY%20GENERATOR.pdf (http://www.mediafire.com/view/ybmdtyn38d3eo5i/PROPOSAL%20FOR%20A%20MOTIONLESS%20OVERUNITY%20GENERATOR.pdf)


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 23, 2013, 03:52:28 PM
Hannon
    Schicko is trying to give you a simple short cut by using a sound editor computer based program to generate the input signals for the electromagnets. By your resistance to the idea I have to guess you have never used such a thing before.
   The wires leading to the speaker can provide a pulsing dc signal that you can adjust on your screen. You could even go as far as to gut a pair of blown out speakers and use the voice coils by removing the magnet and leaving the slug that the coil slides up and down on just glue it to the slug.
   Then you can adjust the dwell and angle of the signals with less effort then it takes to explain. You could go altra lazy and record the signal from a single wire of a ac source as your sound to edit with a sensing coil which works like a clamp on amp meter. Lay in a second track and start adjusting till they overlap just right. Might need a rectifier in there to protect your pc sound card. You get stereo outputs from your computer so two individually controlled line outputs are already there. the head phone port would be the cheapest to connect to.
   Im not sure what the limitations of those programs are so far as frequency they can handle or the maximum output power. Last time I used one I didn't get any work done just spent all day playing making myself sound like Darth Vadar and messing up music recordings.
    90 degrees out of phase is perhaps the wrong way the express it,but it's easier to say that then to say an unknown degree of delay of two identical frequencies clipped off for + v only.

  Personally Im working on the Tesla ring version for a couple reasons. Automotive  alternators I have several which I have broken down completely and would like to find a way the use parts from them. The stators are readily available in quantities. The materials already have defined specs both for the material and performance tolorences for heat ect... A lot of the work has already been done and repeatable builds easier form parts that can be sourced. Tesla's ring version places the induced on the outside of the coils.They are layered up or outward rather then placing them between inducers. The induced windings are not tightly wound but have a uniform spacing of 1 to 5 so far as I can tell form looking at it and several layers of windings for the inducers compared to one layer of the induced with it's spacing of 5 to 1. The option to add more layers by wrapping iron between them has my curiosity. In any case I don't want to end up with something that just powers a couple LED lights. Once i get my power bill down to 100. or less a month I can go solar pretty cheaply.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 23, 2013, 10:04:53 PM
Visual Analyser Project - Scope Freeware
Good up to 10Khz
You do not need to buy the hardware for it to work.
But if you can, will have a useful tool for a good price.

http://www.sillanumsoft.org/download.htm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 24, 2013, 12:50:03 AM
I do not know how to link pictures with a post, so I am just placing the
links below. Link 1 is for a 555 circuit, Link 2 is for house electrical
connection, and Link 3 is for fifty different 555 circuits.

In the picture in Link 1,  the top 555 Sinewave output picture might help.
The output is similar to a sinewave, but it is above 0 volt. If using a 12 volt
suppply, the output would be about 11 volts and up to 200 mA. The output
would need to be raised somehow.

Link 2 shows how U.S. houses are connected to the grid. In the top left side
you will notice that the input to the transformer is split on the secondary,
and the wave forms are "out of phase" by 180 degrees.

If you take the output from the 555 chip, amplify it, use a RC low
pass filter to get a sinewave, then use a transformer that has a split
secondary, would that work?

Link 1:
http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/images/555-Osc-1.gif

Link 2:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html#c1

Link 3:
http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/50%20-%20555%20Circuits.html#B
THE SIMPLEST 555 OSCILLATOR
The simplest 555 oscillator takes output pin 3 to capacitor C1 via resistor R1.
When the circuit is turned on, C1 is uncharged and output pin 3 is HIGH. C1
charges via R1 and when Pin 6 detects 2/3 rail voltage, output pin 3 goes LOW.
R1 now discharges capacitor C1 and when pin 2 detects 1/3 rail voltage, output
pin 3 goes HIGH to repeat the cycle. The amount of time when the output is HIGH
is called the MARK and the time when the output is LOW is called the SPACE.
In the diagram, the mark is the same length as the space and this is called 1:1
or 50%:50%. If a resistor and capacitor (or electrolytic) is placed on the output,
the result is very similar to a sinewave.

IMPROVING THE SINKING OF A 555
The output of a 555 goes low to deliver current to a load connected as shown in the
circuit below. But when the chip is sinking 200mA, pin 3 has about 1.9v on it. This
means the chip does not provide full rail voltage to the load. This can be improved by
connecting pin 7 to pin3. Pin 7 has a transistor that connects it to 0v rail at the same
time when pin 3 is LOW. They can both be connected together to improve sinking
capability. In this case the low will be 800mV for 200mA instead of 1900mV, an
improvement of 1100mV. This will add 1v1 to the load and also make the chip run
cooler.

Hope some of this might help,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 24, 2013, 02:19:56 PM
RMatt
 I am curious, why do you want to use ic's to build a driver oscillator?

 Im not against it entirely because it may become a required component but I dont think the original idea required it to function as it was intended to operate simple resistive and inductive loads according to time period. Inductive loads are indicated in both types which I believe was the timing device in the form of a free wheeling motor placed on the output side. Because in a state of self acting a balance would have to exist between the oscillation of the load/s and the original source of power used to start it in order for it work as a self runner. In operation if the load circuit being the induced had a quantity of  current circling were viewed as one half and the source plus the inducers were viewed as the other half. If the two were equal then adding more into the magnetic field of the inducers would not be needed. A difference in potential would hopefully not exist or be so so small that it would be practically zero. The only part I can see which has a way to be minipulated  is the magnetic filed. One of the ways to make a stronger magnet is to provide more turns of wire without increasing current. A stronger field will provide greater induced current on the output. So a up close Nat's ass view of everything going on in time on the load circuit is next because unless you can find exactly when and where to connect magnetically or electrically a step up function to retard the voltage potential so there is no difference between load and source even at the fraction of a second the current switches from + to - in the cycle.
   Let the arguments begin!
 A snapshot of time. One load, two wires, an alternating current. Are we going to use high and low voltage potentials or pressure and vaccume ,ying and yang ,black and white whats the flavor of the day everyone can agree on to describe the activity?
   Regardless of your designation for it, there has to be a greater and lesser in order for the "it" to flow from one place to another. There has to be an accounting for the distance the volume the resistance to the movement/flow when applicable.
   Another argument I would like introduce is friction. Friction is a form of resistance which restrict the movement or flow of something. What is it that is being consumed when movement or flow is restricted? Is a restriction invincible ?
   In a snap shot voltage is at a higher potential on one wire and lower on the other with a restriction in between. The restriction can be in the form of a poor conductive element or a long section of wire condensed into a small space to accumulate a strong magnetic effect in that small space ie a magnet. Agree or disagree so far?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 27, 2013, 05:52:55 PM
Hi Doug,

Hanon was looking for signals which did not change polarity between +positive and -negative,  and were out of phase. The links I gave above could possibly give him the signals he was looking for.
That is why I listed them, if that is alright with you?

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 27, 2013, 06:41:45 PM
No way Bob, they are in search of something sacred. ;D
Something we mere mortals can not understand.  :-[
Mr. Figuera said (it's so simple that even a child can build).  8)
I say (people with preconceived ideas fail to understand or build).  ::)

It's all a joke on people, do not take it seriously ok, remember that we are all in the same direction, maybe different ways, but the direction is the same.  ;)

Happy new year to all!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 27, 2013, 11:25:39 PM
Thank you Schiko,

We all have to have a little fun every now and then, lol. ;D

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 30, 2013, 03:58:18 PM
The first thing I said I was not entirely against it using a modern sound generator to make the signal.
  Am I looking for something secred ? ,no I wouldnt say that. Im sure some person will be able twist it that way to discredit any functioning method or design. Much like the buzz word "conspiracy" has effected investigative reporting. Anything can be discredited by those practiced in the art of.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 30, 2013, 05:53:37 PM
Hi Doug,

I was not trying to "Harsh your mello, dude". I know you are smarter than me. I was trying to
share so information that I thought Hanon, or someone else might find interesting. You made your
comments, then I made a joke. I did not mean to upset anyone, it was just a joke.  :) When I can
afford some test equipment, I will try those very same suggestions just to see if anything good
will happen with them.

Peace man,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 31, 2013, 05:17:48 AM
@Doug1

Relax man ...
As I said before, we're all going in the same direction!
Some with more knowledge, and more technics.
Others with less technics and less knowledge, but all going in the same direction.
The problem is: people trying to help with new theories outside the focus of the thread hinders more than helps because it confuses the objectives and efforts of all who are really trying solve the problems.
This becomes exhausting and discouraging for everyone I think.
I guess Bajac had already told this in previous posts.
Another thing, everyone that have replicate the patent 1908 reached the same results I arrived, just an efficient converter.
But in my tests I noticed strange behaviors under certain circumstances, so keep trying.  8)
And what I have said here so far has been experienced by most people at the beginning of the thread ...
I said the machine " can " work well in " high frequency " and she works best as a transformer to " pulses " as the original machine, and anyone who says otherwise is why did not understand how the machine works.

As for hanon, I just wanted help with a simple solution, if it has a computer was just download the program "oscilloscope" and connect the audio output of your PC in a home audio amplifier.
Make a voltage divider and use the audio input from the PC to test the signals, turning the PC into a simple but functional oscilloscope and signal generator.
The machine is not a motor, does not need excessive electrical power to work if the principle is correct should also work with mW ...
And to test their theories in practice.
I guess the intention was the same as Bob.
It was not to cause "anger" anyone.  :-[
I sometimes exaggerated in kidding, sorry if I offended or hurt someone was not my intention.  :-[

Happy new year to all !!!  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 31, 2013, 05:43:55 AM
Here is a sample of the program running on my PC.

You still get the gift of a frequency counter, and a voltmeter.
Are not precision devices but work very well.
The waveform generator may also generate square and triangular wave.
The voltage divider you calculated according to the sensitivity of the audio input of your PC.
Treating the square wave signal you can control a MOSFET driver directly in a very simple way.
Hands on.
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 31, 2013, 08:56:40 AM
The real deal is to ask the correct questions. Look at the scopeshots and tell me what is going on in circuit in the point on top of green waveform. ::)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on December 31, 2013, 09:16:06 AM
hi all
can anyone confirm soundcard produce signal always above positive ?.

thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 31, 2013, 04:00:54 PM
@forest
Now this is a job for hanon!  ::)  ;D


@Marsing
You have to treat the signal, because basically it is a common audio signal.
If you understand a bit of electronics is easy!

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 01, 2014, 04:44:06 PM
 Im not smarter then anyone ells, maybe older.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on January 01, 2014, 05:15:22 PM
Well Doug,

I'm 50, but sometimes it feels like I'm about 90 ;D

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 01, 2014, 07:15:09 PM
 I wont insist on being called sir although i could lol. Whipper snapper.
 Im in the middle of enjoying an epiphany.  I will probably  forget what is is shortly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on January 01, 2014, 07:54:01 PM
Yes Sir  ;D, same here  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 02, 2014, 02:44:36 AM
Happy new year to all of you! I hope your projects will materialized this year.


I wanted to share with you my progress. As I stated before, I have to rebuild the "Energy Tower" because of the extremely low number of turns of the coils. I did not want to wind the coils manually so I purchased an old coil winding machine. I just finished winding the first section of the device. It was kind of fun using the winder, and in my first trial I was able to make them in just four hours. Here are some pictures of the transformer's section:

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/w5yl.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/w5yl.jpg/)


Primary:
750 Turns #16 AWG - Taps: 200, 400, and 600


Secondary:
300 Turns #12 AWG

Also note that I replaced the metal screws with ones built with Nylon.

I will use #14 AWG for the other secondaries. It is somewhat difficult to use #12 AWG wire for such a small iron core.


I am planning on running some experiments within the following two weeks. I will keep you posted.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on January 03, 2014, 12:00:23 AM
@bajac

I am anxious to see the device working!  :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 03, 2014, 01:35:20 AM
Bajac: In theory the Figuera device should work. The big question is of course is it ou.
Good luck with your replication. Good science is always worth learning about.
Please post your results.
All the best.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on January 03, 2014, 09:38:44 AM
Hi Bajac
Glad to see youre still on it !
may u show us what kind of commutator are u using ?, I made one with two comms. from two identical car window DC motors, 8 segments,two brushes each.(4 alternating paired segments with 100 ohms resistor)
I´ll try to input a square pulse over 0, Not smooth, but I think of higher freq.
May post a pic. if someone interested.
Thanks for posting.

a.king21
after revising my posts, I think I owe to apologize for an unfortunate comment I did about your comparison of Tesla (rotating field) and its similarity with Figuera´s patents. Sorry for that. I really appreciate all input of yours, as I learn from everyone here.

kind regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 03, 2014, 09:29:46 PM
First, I will use a step drive to generate the two 90 degree phase shifted voltages. I already started writing the code for an Arduino's controller. As a back up, I also have the electronic switching device with the seven resistors as intended in the Figuera's patent.


However, the resistor method is the worse approach for generating the two primary voltages. I am sure that Mr. Figuera use it because he did not have many choices and because of its simplicity. Getting the two phase shifted primary voltages from a small motor-generator configuration had been the only efficient method in 1908.


You should keep in mind the following design criteria when using the voltage division resistor method:


1) Recall that the input voltages have AC and DC components.
2) The resistors value must be chosen to match the impedance of the primary coils to keep the ratio of the AC-to-DC voltage components to a maximum.
3) Practically, how does one know that the resistors' values are just right? The best way is to use an oscilloscope to check the voltage waveform. If the resistor value is too high, the voltage waveform will show small increase and a sudden large peaks. If the resistor value is too low, the minimum voltage value will be high making the AC amplitude (component) small.


It is somewhat difficult to apply mathematics to calculate the value of the resistors because of the large amount of harmonics produced when switching on/off each of the seven resistors.


The Figuera's devices should use step-triangular or half-sine voltage waveform. Square wave should not be applied to this devices. The applied voltage shall increase and decrease gradually. Square and rectangular voltages will just increase and decrease instantaneous.


That is the reason why Figuera went though all the trouble for using the resistors to generate the triangular voltages.


Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 04, 2014, 12:42:12 AM
It's just dawned on me why this device will work ou.
Figuera is mixing DC with AC on the collapse of the magnetic field.
This is a known OU phenomenon and was used by Carlos Benitez in his patents!
So for this device to work you need to have pulsed DC (or even ordinary DC)  mixed with radiant energy generated AC.
Good luck. I am really interested now.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on January 04, 2014, 01:03:46 AM
Bajac: In theory the Figuera device should work. The big question is of course is it ou.
Good luck with your replication. Good science is always worth learning about.
Please post your results.
All the best.

In theory, theory and practice should be the same. In practice.... they are often different.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 04, 2014, 01:48:58 AM
King,


It has nothing to do with radiant energy/electricity. I already explained in the published article how overunity can be achieved by fooling the effects of the Lenz's law. However, the paper does not explain where the extra energy is coming from. But, do I care? Not at this stage.


I highly recommend you to read the article.


Whatever we are doing here has enormous implications. I am pretty sure that the physical model that scientists have put together to explain the laws of nature and the universe is wrong because they do not take into account these overunity phenomena already proved by Mr. Tesla and Mr. Figuera.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 05, 2014, 05:00:06 PM
Bajac
    There is no extra power needed. Power is a measure of a reaction like work done results in what ever was the objective. The extra power is not an extra just a better use of the power you start out with for a period of time in such a way that where the potential is lower after performing some work it is tricked into providing a reaction which is large enough to satisfy the continuation of the work being done through transformations or translation depending on your use of the word. At a high enough level to prevent anymore of the source from entering the system If you assume a 1 to 1 ratio of power used compared to work done or less then you have to assume the system was designed that way for economic reasons. Everything learned for such a system that uses continuous input will not support anything different.
  Have you measured potentials yet in the load circuit? If you plan to use the load as a source after the start up you will have to be very intimate with every inch of the load circuit. Treating it as a group of magnetic events per cycle. In order for the device to have a self acting field strong enough to prevent any incoming source current you'll need two equal magnetic fields where you would normally think there is one. The second one is not supplied with an equal amount of current as the first but still it has be magnetically just as strong as the one tied to the source for it to induce into the inducer enough field strength to translate back to the load. The load becomes the source when the reaction can be magnified into a larger event with no more then is left at the end of the event in terms of current or potential.
 When it is right it will work anywhere anytime on everything. Every living thing that ever was or will ever be is your model.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 09, 2014, 06:17:16 PM
Well I spent all morning getting pictures on line!
I am building the "OLD SCHOOL" version of this device. The pictures show my "resistor." This is an
electric heater that I bought at the biggest store chain in the us. The price was under $20.00. If
needed I can put the core back into its original plastic housing and use the fan to cool the heating element.
I made a drawing of a sign wave superimposed on a graph of squares on my computer. Across the top is
time moving from right to left. Down the left side are ohms from zero downward to around forty-two on the left.
As you can see the values on the paper indicate the actual values I obtained by using my ohm meter.
I am currently, after getting the pictures online, making a new attempt to only have eight spaces for time
across the top. I believe this is what the Mr. Figeura had in mind.

Swamp
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 09, 2014, 06:19:35 PM
Picture 2
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 09, 2014, 06:20:30 PM
Picture 3

Swamp
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 10, 2014, 07:36:49 PM
This is my last try to get pictures.
Sorry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 12, 2014, 04:28:41 PM
View for the top of the two coil "resistor."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 12, 2014, 06:12:59 PM
TEST#1 - Open Circuit Testing voltages and Currents (NO LOAD) - TAP = 600 Turns.


Transformer's data:


Input coils #1 and #3 Taps: 200, 400, 600, and 750 turns of # 16 AWG.


Output coil #2: 300 Turns of #12 AWG.



Picture 'TableSettingTest1' shows the Table configuration for testing my a single section. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/0msrlfj (https://imageshack.com/i/0msrlfj)
You can see the power supply on the right having an adjustable auto transformer, the transformer's coils on the center, and the step drive and arduino controller on the left.


Picture 'StepDrive2M542Tables' shows a closeup view of the step driver. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/nq2sjxj (https://imageshack.com/i/nq2sjxj)


Picture "ArduinoControllerConnection' shows a closeup view of the arduino controller having a shield attached. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/f1k3nsj (https://imageshack.com/i/f1k3nsj)


Picture 'ArduinoCodeTest1' shows the arduino program used to provide the pulses to the step drive. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/mas3npj (https://imageshack.com/i/mas3npj) Notice the frequency is set for 32KHz. The step drive was set for 25,600 micro-stepping generating an output voltage on coil#2 of about 58.8 Hz. Note: the output pin is #13 (not #6 as stated in the notes)


Picture 'CurrentAt120VacTest1' shows the AC current at 120Vac going into the power supply. See this link: [size=78%]https://imageshack.com/i/09bxkdj (https://imageshack.com/i/09bxkdj)[/size]
notice that the current is barely visible in the analog scale.


Picture 'StepDriverVoltageOutput' shows the DC PWM voltage out of one of the step driver outputs. See this link: [size=78%]https://imageshack.com/i/n9cijij (https://imageshack.com/i/n9cijij)[/size]
As expected, notice the square shape of the voltage waveform.


Picture 'StepDriveCurrentOutputTest1' shows the DC current out of one of the step driver outputs. See this link: [size=78%]https://imageshack.com/i/0f9wz2j (https://imageshack.com/i/0f9wz2j)[/size]
Notice the spikes generated. Anyway, the overall shape is pretty good.



Picture 'AcVoltOutputCoil2Test1' shows the AC output voltage from coil #2. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/0stc73j (https://imageshack.com/i/0stc73j)
The data measured for this voltage are the following: Vrms =16.40 Vac; Vp-p = 40 Vac; Freq = 58.8 Hz. Notice the good quality of the voltage waveform (it looks similar to a modified sine wave provided by inverters). The voltage output looks much better than the one using the seven resistor method.

I also wanted to add that the loses are minimum when using this method to generate the primary voltages. The resistor method generates a lot of heat and losses.

I will run more open voltage test for the other taps to then proceed with the load and short circuit tests.


As I stated before, I am kind of disappointed that none in this forum have gotten good testing results with the resistors. Instead, I see many people confused and moving away in the wrong direction (not the one recommended by Figuera and I). We need to stop the BS theory and move into construction as originally intended in this forum.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 12, 2014, 08:22:32 PM
I truly believe that the talented people on this forum will find out the answers to the Figeura device.
Way back in the forum on post 87 BaJac stated "JUST REPLICATE THE DEVICE AS SHONE IN THE PATENTS!!!"
I agree.
When I read about the device on "Practical Guide to Free Energy Devices" I had a few thoughts about the device.
The first thought was, how can one get a true sign wave without varying the ohms to follow the wave. Oh course,
since then I read this happens when a square wave is run through a coil! Oh well.
 I will start on four sets of transformers as soon as I finish building my coil winding device.
Good luck to all, including me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 12, 2014, 08:33:42 PM

Note that TEST #1 generated an output rms voltage for the secondary of about 16.5 Vac. To get the 120 Vac target, I would need to build 7 more sections if using that particular tap (600 turns.)
[size=78%]
[/size]
I want to say that a secondary coil with 300 turns is still not ideal. For the next section, I am planning to make a secondary coil with 500 turns of #14 AWG.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 12, 2014, 11:36:53 PM
Shadow, when do you estimate your setup will be goo for testing? I love to see how Figuera's original device would have worked?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 13, 2014, 02:02:00 AM
I just finished for the night but I wanted to share some more findings.


As illustrated in the figures that were posted, the PWM function can be used to generate the two primary voltages. However, the problem with the step driver is that it behaves as a current source. In this initial stage, we want to get away from the current source because it can create issues that can complicate our understanding of the Figuera's device. I am working on using the PWM outputs from arduino and connect them to a high power H-Bridge.


In addition, the performance of the device is better for the taps at 600 and 750 turns. The taps for 200 and 400 turns generate wave forms with a lot of harmonics. The 200 turn tap is the worst.


I will keep you posted. Thank you.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 13, 2014, 02:18:14 PM
Probably finish in the next two weeks or so!
Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on January 13, 2014, 04:49:49 PM


Alrightythen...


I have found a simple way to do the coil driving with Arduino!


All you need is:
1. ONE 10k/100k Ohm potentiometer. Connect the middle leg to Arduino's "A0" analog input. The other two legs of the pot goes to +5V and GND on Arduino.
2. TWO Logic Level MOSFET transistors to do the switching (Logic level - like in IRL series -  means that a mosfet is in a conduction saturation state at just +5V put to its gate). Connect the Gate of one mosfet to "Pin 3" and the others' gate to "Pin 11". Sources go to the "GND" of the Arduino board.
3. Connect +(positive) from a battery to both "North" & "South" coils and their ends to both drains in the two mosfets and -(negative) to the Arduino's "GND" close to the Source legs of mosfets.
4. Connect fast shottky diodes across each coil to do the freewheeling of current.


Program description:
Arduino is generating a digital signal at 32 kHz frequency using 2 PWM outputs. The value for each "sample" is taken from the sine table. There are 256 values of resolution for the "shape" of the sine wave and 256 values of amplitude. You can change phase shift by changing "offset" variable. Potentiometer allows to set the analog frequency from 0 to 1023 Hz at 1 Hz resolution...




NOW copy the code below to Arduino IDE window and save it to the microconroller and HERE YOU GO! ;)


Quote
/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
 * modification by kEhYo77
 *
 * Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
 * http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
*/




#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM




// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {
  127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
  242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
  221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
  76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
  33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124




};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator




int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase




double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6;      // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;




// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count;              // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator;   // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m;  // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.




void setup()
{
  pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  Setup_timer2();
 
  //Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
  cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0);              //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
  sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2);              //enable Timer2 Interrupt




  dfreq=10.0;                    //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
  tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //calulate DDS new tuning word
 
  // running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
  bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);




}
void loop()
{
        apin0=analogRead(0);             //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
        if(dfreq != apin0){
          tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //Calulate DDS new tuning word
          dfreq=apin0;
        }
}




//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM,  16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
  // Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
  sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);




  // Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0);  // clear Compare Match
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
 
  // Mode 1  / Phase Correct PWM
  sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20); 
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}








//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
  phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
  current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24;     // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information                     
 
  OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
  OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 14, 2014, 01:19:25 AM
Thanks KEhYo for the information. I will use test it and see how it works.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 15, 2014, 12:44:41 AM
Hi all,

I am pretty sure that with a magnetic amplifier (saturable reactor) we can get the two opposite signals needed for the Figuera´s 1908 patent. For example: with a magnetic amplifier an audio amplifier (push-pull) may be implemented.

Idea: use a rectified AC signal as input to a magnetic amplifier in order to regulate the output signal with negative feedback, (negative gain) so that an increase in the input will make a decrease in the output (see attached sketch)

Some important facts about mag amp:

"The magnetic amplifier, like the vacuum tube and the transistor, is an electrical control valve where a smaller current controls another circuit´s larger current"

"With a magnetic amplifier you can control AC load current only. For DC applications it is possible to control an AC current and rectify the output"

"Magnetic amplifer control circuits should accept AC input signals as well as DC input signals. The DC input signal is called "bias". The most effective way to apply bias to a saturable core and also allow AC input signals to control the magnetic amplifier is to use a bias winding"

I attach an schematic to clarify this idea. The schematic is just to show the main idea. It is not a working design because I am not an expert (maybe someone more skillfull into mag amps may design a working device...). The main advantage is that this will be a very easy implementation. Any expert around here?

http://maybaummagnetics.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/68-71-27-2.pdf (http://maybaummagnetics.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/68-71-27-2.pdf)

http://avstop.com/ac/apgeneral/magneticamplifiers.html (http://avstop.com/ac/apgeneral/magneticamplifiers.html)

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/33587/controlling-a-current-with-another-home-made-alternatives-to-the-transistor (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/33587/controlling-a-current-with-another-home-made-alternatives-to-the-transistor)

http://www.tpub.com/neets/book8/32o.htm (http://www.tpub.com/neets/book8/32o.htm)

http://www.rfcafe.com/references/popular-electronics/magnetic-amplifiers-jul-1960-popular-electronics.htm (http://www.rfcafe.com/references/popular-electronics/magnetic-amplifiers-jul-1960-popular-electronics.htm)

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Magnetic_Amplifiers/ (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Magnetic_Amplifiers/)


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 17, 2014, 01:32:37 PM
Ok, Guys,
I was getting something like 16V at the secondary and more power going in than going out. Does that mean that Figuera's device does not work? Not necessarily! I need to increase the secondary power output. How do I do that? One thing is for sure, 300 turns in the secondary is too low. Even though it is not stated in the patent, it is clear to me that this device requires a lot of turns to make it work. A lot of turns in the primary and secondary coils.
I will increase the secondary power by increasing the number of turns to increase the voltage. THIS DEVICES WILL NEVER SATURATE THE IRON CORE BECAUSE OF THE HIGH RELUCTANCE OF THE AIR GAPS! So do not be afraid to add turns to this device.
I am in the process of making a secondary coil with about 1,000 turns. I will let you know the results.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 17, 2014, 01:41:52 PM
The reason why the power output is increased by just adding turns to the secondary is because there is no relation between the input and output currents, that is, there are no effects of the Lenz's law.
In standards transformers, adding turns to the secondary coil would decrease the output current to maintain the I_primary/I_secondary current ratio of these transformers. And, if the secondary current is increased, so will the primary. This is no the case for the Figuera's devices.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 17, 2014, 02:52:38 PM
The reason why the power output is increased by just adding turns to the secondary is because there is no relation between the input and output currents, that is, there is no effects of the Lenz's law.
In standards transformers, adding turns to the secondary coil would decrease the output current to maintain the current ratio of these transformers. And, if the secondary current is increased, so will the primary. This is no the case for the Figuera's devices.
Noted.
 Also at the time the fashion was for high turns secondary. It was an accepted fact because  the interrupter was a common feature of most coils. Sometimes the interrupter is not even mentioned, and I was wondering about Figuera in that light.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 17, 2014, 05:52:51 PM
Noted.
 Also at the time the fashion was for high turns secondary. It was an accepted fact because  the interrupter was a common feature of most coils. Sometimes the interrupter is not even mentioned, and I was wondering about Figuera in that light.
Hi,

Which interrupter? Could you clarify that idea? A picture or link will be nice to see it

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 17, 2014, 06:13:30 PM
Interrupter is a make/break switch (usually electromagnetic) designed for DC transformer
operation. Think how an old electric bell works. So it is effectively a RADIANT ENERGY DEVICE!!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 19, 2014, 09:03:39 PM
Bajac
  In order for the device to be able to function at some point without adding more current from the batteries or source there has to be a method to loop the current from the load back into the inducer coils and in doing so there will be less of it after the load has consumed what it needs. The potential will be lower between the load and the return path compared to the leading direction of current to the load.Potential drops,higher in the beginning lower at the end. Which is hard for anyone to argue regardless of type of current dc or ac.
   The inducers manifest a magnetic field between which the induced will reside.
 The circuit of the induced does not show a wire connection back to the source or to the inducers.Unless I am mistaken.
    So the magnetic field must be conserved once established by movement of the field within the core/s and regenerative even after load consumption.You can refer to magnetic reminence in a self exiting generator where the left over magnetic field is used to increase the rotor field strength on the start up of the gen. The field in rotation is induced into the stator the current from there is used to further power up the rotor enough to hold a stable output.
  The strength of the field produced by the inducers must be greater then the field in the consuming circuit. Adding more turns to a conductor (mag wire) increases resistance with length of wire being longer in order for it to make more turns. Unless,,,,, you use more conductors and combine them only on the ends there by increasing the turns without increasing the resistance. With a little creativity of compounding some of the conductors some of the current used to establish the field by the source may be stored within the core to produce the same effect as a rectifier.Instead of blocking current it would be blocking the propagation of the magnetic field reflected back from the induced circuit and forcing it to re enter the coil/s in the same direction as the source would to complete the loop magnetically.
 As to turns count ,before the holidays I had come up with 2008 T per inducer with 56 strands 200.66 ft of wire for my use.Keeping conductor length at that which has very little resistance per strand. The resistors are supposed to handle the steering of the currents into the inducers with out wasting power. If the path to one of the inducers is an easier path then through the resisters it will follow to the inducer intended.They to will have to be compared to and match the load circuit and resistance of it in terms of reluctance set up in the induced coil to prevent the induced coil from dominating the inducers. For the purpose of testing, lights would work well as resisters with varied sizes and wattage's. The object being no lights should actually light up if the current is going mostly to one of the desired inducers avioding the path of resistance. If a light or number of lights were to become lit it would indicate there is too much reluctance against the inducers and the load is too large for size of the electro magnets making up the inducers.
  No you may not have a picture.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: that-prophet on January 20, 2014, 05:00:05 AM
yes, you loop the cureent
with pulleys of different sizes
you can not only loop it
but you can multiply it
with sinple pulleys

free energy is so simple
that we have overlooked it

Free energy has been discovered = (this is a Gift from God)
http://free-energy.yolasite.com/
I call this free energy machine a GEM = (God s Electricity Multiplier)

This Christian Warrior was shown this Miracle by the God of our Holy Bible
-   from The God of the Bible = (Father +Jesus +Holy Spirit)

When you take a careful look at this technology
-   It seems obvious (the more generators you add, the greater the multiplication factor)
-   -   You put power into a motor with a large pulley
-   -   -   Which you only have to turn the one single turn (very little energy)

Then you take power out of the one to a hundred small pulleys with generators
-   That you attach to the same belt
-   -   Each generator rotates tens to hundreds of times faster
-   -   -   Each rotation gives you electricity (lots of energy)
-   -   -   -   It is truly that simple
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 20, 2014, 11:26:04 PM
lol Im scared of belts and pulleys they have not done well for automotive alternator except to keep the engine business alive.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on January 21, 2014, 05:54:15 AM
Hi,

Which interrupter? Could you clarify that idea? A picture or link will be nice to see it

Regards

hi...    hanon
more about   interrupter    google    "  ruhmkorff coil " . 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 04:55:48 AM
I have performed two changes:
First, I replace the 300T coil with an 800T. And,
Second (the most important) is the replacement of the 0.6 mm air gap spacers with 0.1 mm. The performance improved dramatically. I have the primary and secondary iron cores practically touching each other but there is not electrical continuity (isolated) for very small air gaps.
I am sure that there is a way of adjusting the reluctances of the air gaps. For example, the standard transformers have the ‘E’ and ‘I’ electrically isolated but the reluctance of the magnetic path is made very low by overlapping the ‘E’ and the ’I’. What I want to say is that the reluctance of the air gaps can be adjusted lower by partially overlapping the ‘C’ and the ‘I’ of the Figuera’s devices. The electrical isolation should be maintained to get the required air gap reluctances. By doing the latter, it might be possible to use secondary coils with lower number of turns and high current output. I have this task as an item in my “to do” list.
I am still using the step driver, which is not good because it behaves as a current source instead of a voltage. I am in the process of replacing the driver for a more suitable power supply.
 
Look at the tables of the attached document showing the open and short tests results for the 400T and 600T primary taps.
The output power calculated above is based on a Thevenin circuit. The power output is the power absorbed by the internal resistance. As a conservative value, assume 30% error to account for measurement issues.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 03:11:52 PM
Do not feel disappointed if you do not see huge power gains (KW). This is a device with a technology that we have just started to experiment with. It will take some time to get the feeling for its design and extra its full potential.


According to the news, Mr. Figuera was able to make very powerful MEGs. And, I am confident that we will be able to replicate his apparatus.


Being an engineer and having more than 30 years of experience in the field, this moment is a turning point in my professional life. I would have never expected to see a device that can output more than what is being input. At least, that what is taught at all engineering schools.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 03:36:59 PM
Please, note how the results from tests #11 and #12 do not practically change. This is because of the step driver saturation. When using the 600T and 750T taps, the step driver cannot increase the voltage any further to maintain a current preset (Ipeak). The voltage limit for this step driver is 50 Volts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 22, 2014, 03:51:13 PM
Do not feel disappointed if you do not see huge power gains (KW). This is a device with a technology that we have just started to experiment with. It will take some time to get the feeling for its design and extra its full potential.


According to the news, Mr. Figuera was able to make very powerful MEGs. And, I am confident that we will be able to replicate his apparatus.


Being an engineer and having more than 30 years of experience in the field, this moment is a turning point in my professional life. I would have never expected to see a device that can output more than what is being input. At least, that what is taught at all engineering schools.


Am I reading your results correctly?


Cop between 200 and 300%?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 04:46:33 PM
Remember that the 300% power is dissipated in the internal resistance of the secondary coil. It does not mean that I am getting 300% power output being fed to a load (utilization). Nevertheless, it is a clear indication that the Figuera's device is a potential overunity apparatus. Performing such a test on standard transformers would have never shown overunity.


The following link shows a picture of the 800 turns secondary coil and the 0.1 mm (paper thin) air gap spacers: https://imageshack.com/i/1qahf0j (https://imageshack.com/i/1qahf0j)


My experience so far indicates that a fundamental criterion for building this device is the reluctance of the air gaps. Minimizing the reluctance of the air gaps (without eliminating it) is the key. That might be the reason why Figuera stated in his patent that the air gaps can be made small. He considered the role of the reluctance of the air gaps important enough as to be mentioned in his patent.

The next important step is to overlap a little bit the primary and secondary iron cores to decrease the reluctance of the air gaps, even more.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 22, 2014, 05:02:21 PM
I believe Mr Figuera stated that a small part of the output can be used as input.
That would settle the debate once and for all.
No need for measurements to prove the  point if that can be achieved.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 23, 2014, 12:32:56 AM
Bajac, i was wondering if you could outline how you calculated the output power. The figures show you seem to be multiplying the open circuit voltage with the short circuit current and no mention of phase difference.

The way I figure it and the way I believe it is meant to be done is that if the voltage is zero on short circuit then you simply multiply the current by itself.

So then say we take the first measurement in the list I took from your PDF then we multiply the 0.463 x 0.463 we get a result of . 0.215 Watts dissipated. There is no phase difference to consider as there is no voltage. To get the power of a point in time we need to use both figures from the same point in time, the voltage must be measured at the same time as the current (when loaded).

When a battery is used the voltage of the battery is usually fairly stable. But an output coil can have significant voltage drop, which must be considered.

I would suggest using a 10 or 100 Ohm resistor so that a voltage can be measured along with the current and a phase difference is then able to be measured and the real power dissipated calculated.

AC Source:
W = V x A x PF

Example.

So if we measure say 10 volts across a 100 ohm resistor and the phase difference is 45 degree we calculate the power factor by the multiplying the phase angle by cosine, so if the phase difference is 45 degrees then if you plug into a calculator 45 then hit the cosine button the result is 0.70 which is the power factor.

So in my example above, then we multiply the volts by the amps, the amps is 10 volts divided by 100 Ohms or 0.1 amps, the voltage is 10 volts.

So the power in my example is 10 x 0.1 x 0.7 = 0.7 Watts.

Cheers

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 23, 2014, 12:39:45 AM

Because of the importance of minimizing the reluctance of the air gaps, I have given a lot of thoughts lately. I have said before that a big iron core should not make a big difference because the reluctance of the air gap is thousand of times larger than the reluctance of the iron core. Well, that might not be all true. At that time, I did not think of the reduction of the air gap reluctance due to an increase  of the cross sectional area of the iron core.


To prove the above, I will make the next section having an iron core with bigger cross sectional area.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 23, 2014, 12:45:12 AM
Well done Bajac !!!

This is just the beginning . A COP = 3 is a very promising starting point.

Your expertise and skills make sure that the tests are accurate and the measurements are properly executed.

These results shows the potential of this device!!!

Best regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 23, 2014, 01:03:32 AM
The way I figure it the power in the first line of the list of measurements I posted from the PDF shows a power dissipated of 0.215 Watts with an input of 9.2 Watts which works out to 0.215 W out divided by 9.2 W in = 0.02 C.O.P. or an efficiency of 2%.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 23, 2014, 01:40:45 AM
Farmhand,


Based on the oscilloscope current and voltage waveform, I estimated a phase angle of approximately 40 degrees. That is why I proposed a 30% derating factor to account for errors in the phase angle and instrumentation equipment. You can even use 75% error, and still, it looks promising. The results are not conclusive because there are a lot of tests that need to be performed on real loads. We should not get excited, yet. I estimated the power at short circuit from the Thevenin equivalent circuit. You should be careful when applying the Thevenin circuit to batteries. The problem with batteries is that the Thevenin voltage changes with the charging state. That is, the open circuit voltage of new and used batteries are not the same.


In addition, I was frustrated with the step driver. Please, note that not all the settings of the step driver and the primary taps give an apparent overunity. I expect the testing results to improve when using a voltage power supply. I just ordered seven wired wound rheostats of 25W/20-Ohms each. I will build a resistor box and wired them in series. It will be much easier to adjust the value of the rheostats than replacing and soldering individual power resistors.


I am also searching for a dynamo that can generate two voltages with 90 degrees difference. Does anyone know?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on January 23, 2014, 04:30:41 AM

I am also searching for a dynamo that can generate two voltages with 90 degrees difference. Does anyone know?

( i am not sure)
 stepper motor can  generate  that, with low voltage and high ampere
and need low speed to drive stepper.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 23, 2014, 06:18:13 PM
Marsing,
I am sorry for the confusion. What I wanted to say is that I am looking for a dynamo from which two 90 degree out of phase voltages can be generated. Dynamos normally are single phase. But, if the dynamo has four poles, then its internal connections can be modified to output two quadratic voltages. I referred to four poles because the geometrical and electrical degrees coincide.
Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 24, 2014, 02:56:19 AM
Please, note that the results from the tests are preliminary. I would not take these results too seriously.


I just do not like them because the step driver source is not a reliable power source for this particular application. I wanted to share them for argument sake and keep our discussion. Shortly, I hope to start the tests as intended by Mr. Figuera in his patent. Only then, we can discuss the results with more authority.


I have to say that I have gained a lot of knowledge from this setup. In this learning process, I have made few changes and witness the output current grow from 0.1 Amp to about 1.0 Amp. I am sharing my findings in this thread as a way to help you avoid my mistakes.


I cannot wait to build another one with an iron core having larger cross-sectional area.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 24, 2014, 02:02:40 PM
There seems to be some confusion with the application of the Thevenin circuit. Well, the Thevenin circuit is the same for standard transformers also. The circuit has a voltage source (Thevenin) voltage in series with a resistors (Thevenin resistance). At open circuit, there is no current flowing and the output voltage is equal to the Thevenin voltage. As you load the circuit, the current will increase and the output voltage will decrease as per the voltage division formed by the load and the Thevenin resistance (power source internal resistor).
If you continue changing the load, there will be a point at which the load impedance is equal to the internal resistance of the power source (Thevenin resistance). This point is known as the maximum power transfer condition. If you continue changing the load to a zero impendance, the condition is known as short circuit. At short circuit, the power transferred to the load is zero. But the Thevenin circuit (secondary of the transformer) is heavily load showing the higher current value. The secondary of the transformer is producing power at a rate of Voc x Isc which is dissipated in the internal (Thevenin) resistance as heat. That is why the short circuit test shall be as quick as possible. Otherwise, you endup burning the transformer. For standard transfomers, the short circuit test is performed by reducing the applied voltage in order to limit the power being dissipated.
Notice that the maximum power transfer theorem is not used in power systems because 50% of the power being transferred is consumed by the load and 50% is consumed by the transformer. The maximum power condition is only used for communication and audio systems that deal with relatively low amount of power.
I kind of surprise that this basic concept has caused such a ruckus.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 24, 2014, 07:07:41 PM
But coils on a separate cores is not a normal transformer. When I do the experiment with AC a normal coil on a normal core and place another coil on another identical core so the cores are very close together the supply voltage does not drop nor does the supply power increase (if it does it is not much, I cannot notice it, if anything it seems to reduce), only the induced voltage drops in the separate or induced coil and some current flows. If I use the theorem you used I would get similar results with that as well. I will test this second arrangement. The coils in this experiment will have less than 1 Ohm resistance.

Was the AC voltage RMS for all values in your equations ?

Cheers

I guess my point is that if there is extra energy with an arrangement as described then the same would happen with any such arrangement, the excitement method would make little to no difference. If there is extra energy I'll use it, if not I cannot use it. That is my angle.

Why use a special driver, why not power it with an isolation transformer and a sine wave ?

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on January 25, 2014, 02:39:26 AM
Hi Bajac,

On the Barbosa and Leal thread, SolarLab posted in reply #375, an interesting link to a website about Dr. Harold Aspden. In report #1, Dr. Aspden writes in length about "air gaps". I don't know if this will help or not, just thought it interesting.

Bob

Hi Fellows,

Dr. Harold Aspden's two latest patents [UK Patent # 2,432,463 May 23, 2007 and #2,390,941 January 21, 2004] both relating to "Electrical power generating apparatus."

Here are several related links, not only to the patent information but Aether Electric theory in general.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Harold_Aspden (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Harold_Aspden)
Scroll down to the PATENTS heading.

http://haroldaspden.com/ (http://haroldaspden.com/)
http://haroldaspden.com/reports/index.htm (http://haroldaspden.com/reports/index.htm)     
Aspden's "Reports," especially No. 1 and No. 6; you may find provide a fresh prospective (???).

Regards...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 25, 2014, 05:33:07 AM
Bajac, Can I respectfully ask what the DC resistance of your 800 turn secondary coil is ?

My Tutor indicates that the output impedance is what the Thevenin's Theorem tells us. eg. an open circuit voltage of 50.5 volts and a short circuit current of 0.463 A tell me the output impedance is about 109 Ohms.

Handy online calculator
http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/calc/power-calculator.php

Quote
RESISTANCE, REACTANCE AND IMPEDANCE

Resistance causes the loss of (i.e. dissipates) power,
reactance does not. Pure (ideal) reactance returns all energy that it stores in its field.

http://www.magazines007.com/pdf/Brooks-RCI-2.pdf


And here.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/1.html

Quote
At a frequency of 60 Hz, the 160 millihenrys of inductance gives us 60.319 Ω of inductive reactance. This reactance combines with the 60 Ω of resistance to form a total load impedance of 60 + j60.319 Ω, or 85.078 Ω ∠ 45.152o. If we're not concerned with phase angles (which we're not at this point), we may calculate current in the circuit by taking the polar magnitude of the voltage source (120 volts) and dividing it by the polar magnitude of the impedance (85.078 Ω). With a power supply voltage of 120 volts RMS, our load current is 1.410 amps. This is the figure an RMS ammeter would indicate if connected in series with the resistor and inductor.

We already know that reactive components dissipate zero power, as they equally absorb power from, and return power to, the rest of the circuit. Therefore, any inductive reactance in this load will likewise dissipate zero power. The only thing left to dissipate power here is the resistive portion of the load impedance. If we look at the waveform plot of voltage, current, and total power for this circuit, we see how this combination works in Figure below.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 25, 2014, 04:13:50 PM
RMatt,
Thank you for the information! I have found it very interesting so far. I will keep reading it.


Farmhand,
I prefer to conduct new tests using the 1908 configuration and re-evaluate the results. I just do not see the point for arguing on results from tests that do not really replicate Figuera's settings. Let's just wait a few more weeks when I expect to have completed the driving circuit. Anyway, we have waited for more than 100 years.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 25, 2014, 11:23:50 PM
Then this is for the others who may be interested.

OK then, so lets just suppose the DC resistance of the coil is an arbitrary 5 Ohms and the current is 0.463 Amperes.  Power = Current squared x Resistance or P= (I x I) x R. So assuming that the reactance portion of the impedance does not dissipate power we get the result below.

I = 0.463 Amperes and R = 5 Ohms so 0.463 x 0.463 = 0.214369 x 5 = 1.07 Watts dissipated in the example above.

So now lets say the input for the above example is 9.2 Watts, then if we divide the 1.07 W x 9.2 W = 0.11 % of the input is dissipated in the 5 Ohms DC resistance of the coil.

No point to working out a C.O.P. as there is no output. But if it were expressed as a C.O.P. it would be a C.O.P. = 0.11. I think.

Not knowing any actual resistances I'll leave it at that.

I think it is very important that other people do not get the wrong idea and go shouting C.O.P. 3 which whips up hype.

So the only thing left is for other people to either do the math themselves or get another opinion before they go shouting C.O.P. 3.

I think there is sufficient evidence in the links I provided to suggest the method I employed is correct.

Cheers

P.S. The Thevenin Theorem allow us to ascertain the output impedance and so with that we can calculate the power which would be delivered to a given load.

Maybe someone will confirm or correct my calculation.

..

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 26, 2014, 12:37:41 AM
FYI: in practice things are more complicated.


On a regular basis, I have to witness factory tests and I also have to review the test reports for traction power transformers and rectifier equipment. In these reports, you cannot take for granted the DC resistance of the coils. For example, because the DC resistance changes with temperature we have to use formulas to extrapolate between the DC resistance and the actual temperature of the winding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 26, 2014, 03:19:51 AM
FYI: in practice things are more complicated.


On a regular basis, I have to witness factory tests and I also have to review the test reports for traction power transformers and rectifier equipment. In these reports, you cannot take for granted the DC resistance of the coils. For example, because the DC resistance changes with temperature we have to use formulas to extrapolate between the DC resistance and the actual temperature of the winding.

I didn't take it for granted I asked you but you didn't say so I used an arbitrary figure as an example. As I stated clearly.

The point is only the DC resistance dissipates power. The AC reactance impedance does not.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 27, 2014, 07:01:42 PM
Are we assuming the device in question was producing ac? After looking over the news paper articles I see no evidence which would indicate the currents are alternating or direct. Motors and lights come in both forms ac and dc.
  Many days of deeper reading have brought me to a place where I have some concerns over the assumptions that this device is producing ac currents.Not to say it could not be used by conversion into ac. Just something to think about.
  As for That-Prophet, not only can one make the loop.It can run with gain. 100 watts can become 10,000 as was proven in WWII on most battle ships.It's called an Amplidyne.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 28, 2014, 01:03:45 AM
Hi Doug,

The newspaper references correspond to the 1902 generator which was witnessed by many people and journalist generating 15 HP .  I can not assure which was the actual current output from that machine because the input was stated to be intermittent. The 1902 patents are very poor in details.

Later on, the design evolved into the final patent/device: the 1908 patent metions that the output from the 1908 generator may pass by a conmutator to convert it into direct current if required. Therefore I suppose that the 1908 device produced AC (or a kind of AC wave)

Regards



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 06, 2014, 08:20:15 PM
Hallo Everyone,
this is my first post in OU so please bear with me!
I was reading and following the evolution of different forums and threads related to “Free energy”, and one of most directly related is this one: Figuera Generator.
I took my time to read an re-read the patents and I read also all available information in English and Spanish languages posted here and there by hanon, bajac and other members.
So I did my home work before trying to register here in OU and give my opinion about the invention of Mr. Figuera.

The most significant patent IMO is that one with a rotary commentator. This one tray to SIMULATE or EMULATE the principal of the Dynamo “faraday induction effect”.
In order to get into the subject of his invention, Mr Figuera, took his time to make an introduction to the classical dynamos/generators:
In order to understand what they are, he started by observing the rotation of the rotor (with the induced coil) between the two OPPOSITE poles of two magnets or electromagnets (very known concept).
Then he made his critics regarding this solution (introduced by Gramme, Werner von Siemens, Paxii and others), and he based his opinion explaining the problem with dragging (Lenz low)and subsequently the more energy needed to rotate the rotor, so making them inefficient (energy transformer device).

His solution was: no more moving “rotor” (that means no more energy needed to break the dragging) but instead he was moving magnetic field making so a solid state power generator (analog to the Columbus Eggs or the rotating magnetic field in the Tesla`s patents). And the power needed to create this moving magnetic field is very small and it could be derived from the output power of the device, therfore his device is a generator (not a transformer!).

He invented actually a kind of Resistor ladder (known today as R-2R ladder or DAC), so he could change the tow excitation currents in a complementary fashion, and then supplying them to the 2 primary coils of a transformer (like modern inverters BUT with a different sequence of excitation)!

The construction of his generator was not different from the known dynamos at that time! U-Shape with tow electromagnet and the collecting coil+armature in between them at the free ends, that is all!
He also stated, a small gape OR no gape at all is needed, because there is no need to move or rotate anything, so simple that it does not need any explanation! (they said)

In reality there is no limitation to any kind of shape, you can take any transformer make tow primaries and one secondary and you get a generator (IMHO you can even take a bar of iron or laminatetd core an do the same thing!). maybe the primaries wound a la Tesla bifilar are a must!

The tricky part is the sequence of the tow excitation currents in complementary fashion.  Just like “Arm wrestling” but in a synchronized way.

The 0 current in the output take place when the two primaries current have the same value, because they are creating a N and S poles with the same magnetic field potential in each side of the secondary core.
So indeed he was producing alternating current due to the alternating magnetic polarity created by the two electromagnet working together and at the same time by increasing one and decreasing the other ! (2 trianular waves taking only positive values at 90 deg phase)
I tried to replicate the same commutating solution with a PCB, but the precision was not good and I forgot the most important fact described in the patent:
There must be at least TWO contacting point every time! That means, “abruptly” excitation or de-excitation ARE NOT ALLOWED. No collapsing magnetic field is allowed.

That was the error I made. Now I am trying to make a better commutator, and i am also trying to make a better electronics in order to replace the rotating commutator.

I will share my design of the PCBs and the arduino code (based on public domain version).

Working together and sharing experiences and opinions in a constructive way is the most important step to find the solution for our common problem (make our self’s free!).
Just for your information, the Spanish government created a new low for this year in order to eliminate any alternative energy for personal use by paying taxes more expensive as the price of the grid!!..and  they call it democracy…my post is a claim of the human right to be free for whatever we want to do with our life if we don’t take others freedom.

I m very proud to be part of this revolution and happy to be with you in this hard way!
Best regards
NMS (NoMoreSlave)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 06, 2014, 08:40:06 PM
Some documents of my work

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 07, 2014, 07:35:42 AM
And the power needed to create this moving magnetic field is very small and it could be derived from the output power of the device, therfore his device is a generator (not a transformer!).
Best regards
NMS (NoMoreSlave)

Care to demonstrate the claim you made that I made bold text ?

Have you actually created a rotating magnetic field device and drawn more energy from it than is input to it ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 07, 2014, 09:03:17 AM
This is related to our "contest" about what Tesla archieved with his magnifying transmitter. Activity - you think it is just a synonym for pulse power and there is no OU related , but I think Tesla got OU everytime and his talks about power magnification by capacitor discharge is about real continous POWER OUTPUT.


Ok, I found another gentle tip that nobody understood Tesla but he was not much eager to correct precisely what he got because it was that missing part not included in patents which gave him  advantage over Marconi and others...


I would not said that here but it's related, very deep related.


Here is that tip:


"The arrangement was simply this.  I  had a  number of studs
with cups which were insulated,  24 if I  recollect rightly.  In
the interior was a  mechanism that lifted the mercury, threw it
into these cups, and from these studs there were thus 24
little streamlets of mercury going out. [*]  In the meantime,
the same motor drove a  system with 25 contact points, so that
for each revolution I  got a  product of 24 times 25 impulses,
and when I  passed these impulses  through a  primary, and excited with it a  secondary,  I  got in the latter complete waves
of that frequency.


Counsel
What frequency,  then,  did you get in your secondary?


Tesla
Oh, I  could get in this,  600 per revolution.


Counsel
You mean 600 trains?

Tesla
No, 600 waves.  Assume then,  600 impulses per revolution
and suppose that I  rotated it 100 times per second [6,000
RPM]; then I  would get 600 times 100, or 60,000 primary impulses  [per secondJ,  and in the secondary a  frequency of
60,000 complete cycles.  The primary impulses were unidirectional.  They came from the direct current source, but in the
secondary they were alternating -- full waves.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 07, 2014, 09:12:15 AM
I don't know how hard is to grasp the simple idea that all this free energy is ...something you use everyday but you must not use it without proper paper to use it  >:( >:( >:(  C'mon you must know what I'm talking about
for example about... http://pesn.com/2011/06/11/9501844_Magnacoaster_Keeps_Coasting_Without_Product_Deliveries/ 
what caused them to delay delivery ? some regulations laws which they were hard to avoid because they use that for amplification....  :P
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 07, 2014, 01:58:37 PM
 You are very welcome! NMS.
The more people we have working on the Figuera's concept, the higher the probability to break the shell. By all means, your opinion counts.
Based on my experience building this device, the tricky part is not the generation of the two excitation voltages but the construction of the electromagnets. That is where the invention lies. Of course, there is the important task of adjusting the correct voltage level to the impedance of the primary coils.
I have been making adjustments and getting different performances from this device. It is a lot of work but also a lot of fun! While waiting for the delivery of some components to build the excitation circuit, I have been reading newspaper articles, patents, and any information available from Figuera's time. Something that called my attention is the following passage from the 1902 Spanish patent #30375:
"As the soft iron core of a dynamo becomes a real magnet from the time when current flow along the wire of the induced circuit, we think that this core must be formed or constituted by a group of real electromagnets, properly built to develop the highest possible attractive force, and without taking into account the conditions to be fitted in the induced circuit, which is completely independent of the core."
I think "properly built" implies that this device has some peculiarities and requires adjustment of critical parameters, i.e., high number of turns, the right dimensions of the air gaps and iron cores, etc., in order "to develop the highest possible attractive force." Does the latter implies high intensity of the magnetic fields?
@Farmhand,
Your comment is out of context. NMS was just reciting whatever is written in the Figuera's patents and/or in the news of the time. Why the SARCASM? Up to my knowledge no one has successfully replicated Figuera's devices. But, we are working on it!
I noticed that most of your comments are not constructive but meant to disappoint and sometimes disrupt the effort for replicating this device. Just because we have failed four, five, or ten times do not imply that Figuera's devices did not work. Based on the historical data and the reputation of the persons involved, I am confident that his devices work. Not only that, prior to knowing Figuera's work, I was working on similar devices based on the same principle. That is why it was so easy for me to figure out his work.
It is ok and productive to argue and challenge the work being done but it is not acceptable to make comments with the intention to show off, make people appears like idiots, or even try to discourage them from continuum their research on these devices.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 07, 2014, 02:06:46 PM
which is completely independent of the core.


 ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 07, 2014, 06:22:04 PM
Forest,
 
I was wondering if "completely independent of the core" means that the induced currents in the secondary coils are completely independent of the iron core size. I have previously stated that once the primary magnetic field is established, the secondary currents will depend on the gauge of the secondary wire and not the primary current. I came to this conclusion because if the interaction of the magnetic fields between the primary and secondary coils is minimum (minimum effect of Lenz's law), then, the output current shall be independent of the primary current. That is, there is no fixed current ratio for this device.

I will try to read the original Spanish patent to make sure there is no translation error.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 07, 2014, 09:18:33 PM
Hallo Bajac, Forest, Farmhand and everybody,

Thank you very much for your warm welcome :)

Forest is right about the independency between the 2 driving primaries and the collecting coil or secondary.
if you read the following statement , just after what you sited before in your post, he explained the same thing:

“El procedimiento queda, pues, reducido a establecer un circuito inducido independiente, dentro de la esfera de acción o atmósfera magnética formada
entre las caras polares, de nombre contrario, de dos electroimanes, o series de electroimanes, accionados por corrientes intermitentes o alternas.”

my translation:
The procedure is thus reduced to establish (put) an independent induced circuit, inside the sphere (field) of action formed (created) between the polar faces, WITH OPPOSITE NAME (N-Pole & S-Pole), of two electromagnets, or an array of them, exited with blinking (blinking = fading in/fading-out) or alternating currents. (See attached picture)

in other hand he also stated the following:
“Las actuales dinamos, proceden de agrupaciones de máquinas de Clarke, y nuestro generador recuerda, en su principio fundamental, al carrete de inducción de Ruhmkorff.”

hanon translation:
“The current dynamos, come from groups of Clarke machines, and our generator recalls, in its fundamental principle, the Ruhmkorff induction coil”

I agree with you Bajac about the principal your shared in you documents, but in my INHO, Figuera was just taking the same known construction concept of the Dynamos and he just keeping them quiet silent and without dragging (solid state), and doing so in Canary Island in 1902/1908 should not be so complicated! 

Just trying to give my point of view Farmhand (BTW I appreciate the work your are doing, the constructive critics must be taken in account )
And I m devoted to go after this Figuera generator, at any cost!

The electromagnet lifts over 100 lbs with a AA battery: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGoOu8cPmeM
Now take the same magnetic flux created by this AA battery and shake it or move it at high rate, then put your output coil inside his “sphere of action” to get the juice.
Like this one : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUJza3l8rmU


Best regards,
NMS

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 08, 2014, 12:22:37 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Daniel_Ruhmkorff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Daniel_Ruhmkorff)
I really have to  come in here, so you don't go astray. 
The Ruhmkorff coil is a coil of high inductance designed to produce currents of high voltage and frequency.
The high frequency is produced by the interrupter  which is  a make-break mechanical device with a similar principle to the
old electric bell.
Each make-break of the interrupter produces oscillations in the mhz range.
The Rumkorff coil comes complete with it's resonant capacitor.
During Figuera's time the interrupter and cap were sometimes omitted from schematics because it's action was well
understood.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 08, 2014, 02:23:59 AM
Some documents of my work

Regards,
NMS

Hi NMS,

Welcome to the forum!! Your enthusiasm is really appreciated for us with months without results.

I share with yuo the idea that Figuera tried to emulate a dynamo. but dynamos are charactherized by the flux lines cutting the wires and maybe that was what Figuera looked for with the unphased primaries. I dont know.

Figuera sold his 1902 patents to a banker union just 4 days after filling them. I have even thought that maybe Figuera knew that the patents were going to be sold, and he wrote them  without being very precise. Or he kept occult any key part.

In your post, that I quoted above, there is no attached file. Maybe you forgot to attached it

Regar
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 02:57:41 AM
Hanon,


I have thought a lot about why Figuera's patents look so incomplete. Were these patents tampered with after filing? Patent #30378 reads "...for this generator whose form and arrangements are shown in the attached drawings, ....and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink..." Was there more than one page of drawings? Where is the thick red line representing the secondary coils?


It is very suspicious!!!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 05:08:10 AM
Hallo a.King21,
Thank you for the input, but if you read carefully the patent 30378 you will find the mention of Ruhmkorff:
“…In the arrangement of the excitatory magnets and the induced, our generator has some analogy with dynamos, but completely differs from them in that, not requiring the use of motive power, is not a transforming apparatus. As much as we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of these coils which differs completely. It has the advantage that…” in the case of Figuera, he was using a commutator instead of one breaker and TWO primaries. BUT how is the current induced in the secondary coil of Ruhmkorff induction coil?

@bajac:
This is my answer to your question about “the properly built core” (after the mention of Ruhmkorff-like construction in the patent 30378 ):
“…It has the advantage that the soft iron core can be constructed with complete indifference of the induced circuit, allowing the core to be a real group of electromagnets, like the exciters, and covered with a proper wire in order that these electromagnets may develop the biggest attractive force possible, without worrying at all about the conditions that the induced wire must have for the voltage and amperage that is desired. In the winding of this induced wire, within the magnetic fields, are followed the requirements and practices known today in the construction of dynamos, and we refrain from going into further detail, believing it unnecessary.

IMO he was talking about the advantages of this kind of construction in comparison with the prior art:
In the other generators(he used word Dynamos), due to the rotating armature, you have to adapt or condition the induced coil to the free space you can get inside that armature or core, because of this limitation you cannot get that much from the winding and you have to decide if you want more current (ampers) or more voltage. BUT with his solution, you break that dependency and now you have a freedom to select the appropriate copper sizes at your convenience in order to get the power you need. About the mention of the properly built of the core, he meant –IMO- a stacked or laminated one, that was the optimization made at that time, today we can use commercially available cores, or maybe without any core, but just Tesla bifilar for electromagnet in sandwich form (in my ToDo list).
In the case of tesla bifilar coil (very low self-inductance) as primaries and secondary:
-   Witch induction formula should we use?
-   Is Lenz law also present?

I will tray all this configurations, but first I need get the correct sequence of excitation, because that part seems to be clearly descried in the patents and discussed.
First step is to reproduce the same commutator, scope the two excitation currents coming out from the resistor ladder, then implementing a modern alternative.
The transformer is just a matter of winding an scoping until catching the effect.
A DoE (Design of Experiment) is a good method for every researcher, experimenter.

@hanon: thank you!

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 08, 2014, 05:18:31 AM

hi all
   
i've been watching this thread to find  result from bajac and friend, i made no replication so i can share nothing, NMS you give fresh air ,but where are your documents ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 05:35:05 AM
hmm ...hanon asked the same thing!
I attached a spring layout file (Figuera-zip) containing some ideas that I am using to make my tests.
I upload it hier again.

Please improve it an share!

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 08, 2014, 07:07:34 AM
NMS.
FYI, you never uploaded file before,    ;D
btw, thank you for your quick response.     :)

edit
whatis lay6 extension,  is there any jpg/png/pdf  file?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 08, 2014, 09:38:34 AM
@Farmhand,
Your comment is out of context. NMS was just reciting whatever is written in the Figuera's patents and/or in the news of the time. Why the SARCASM? Up to my knowledge no one has successfully replicated Figuera's devices. But, we are working on it!
I noticed that most of your comments are not constructive but meant to disappoint and sometimes disrupt the effort for replicating this device. Just because we have failed four, five, or ten times do not imply that Figuera's devices did not work. Based on the historical data and the reputation of the persons involved, I am confident that his devices work. Not only that, prior to knowing Figuera's work, I was working on similar devices based on the same principle. That is why it was so easy for me to figure out his work.
It is ok and productive to argue and challenge the work being done but it is not acceptable to make comments with the intention to show off, make people appears like idiots, or even try to discourage them from continuum their research on these devices.
Bajac

Which comment are you referring to ? As I recall I asked two questions directly related to the statement/claim that NMS made. If NMS has done it and can show it, that would be a big help, but just saying it is less than helpful.

I am not making comments with the intention to show off. I have humility enough to admit when I am wrong. No one is perfect.

I am not making people look like idiots, that would not be possible only we can make ourselves look like idiots, besides I am against personal attacks. I make comments about things or ask questions and people attack me personally and declare what my intentions are when they have no idea of my intentions, as well as make false claims about what I say. Misrepresent what I say and try to put words into my mouth that I did not say. 

I am not trying to discourage people from continuing to research anything.

But I am against inflating figures and hyping people up to encourage people to spend time experimenting with the hope of OU.

If we make a claim we should be able to back it up. Or show evidence to back it up.

Another thing that annoys me is the people making claims on behalf of Tesla, claims that Tesla never made.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 08, 2014, 10:55:30 AM
I want to say , that you who can read Spanish directly are at the best way to crack this out, translation to English is not correct in subtle nuances I think (but I don't know Spanish unfortunately just catch single words with many meanigful translations.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 11:01:07 AM
Hallo Marsing,
there is no pdf inside the file, only PCB traces of my setups.
google sprint-layout!

@Famhand,
I must admit that I was following you and other since a LONGTIME ago! Just observing, reading, understanding what is going on.
I read 100.100k of posts: kappa, SM, tesla this tesla that even in 7 different languages .....so I do really know what happened  around me! and what you are traying to say.

But that did not give you right to pies me off after MY FIRST POST!!!
Because I was just giving my own interpretation of the Figuera patents and devices like others perfectly understood AND also did!!
so please be polite and let’s work together because we are SLAVED!!!

Please look how OTTO is still remembered! Look Stievp and the hardworking, look Ufopolitics and others !...thousands of people, look how the world is waking and standing up!... That is my motivation to come here and share my opinion.
I WIL NEVER GIVE UP with or without your help, but it will be nice to have you know-how in our wagon!…so let’s start again!

Could you please tell me what technical aspect of the claims made by Figuera or my explanation/translation you find not correct?

Best wishes to all and everyone taking his time to tray to be FREE!
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 11:12:32 AM
Hallo forest,
you have the spirit and the vision!!
I speak Spanish fluently as my mother tong (and other 6 languages) so I did give you my own interpretation of what I read in the original patents.
hanon did an excellent ACADEMIC translation. He was very precise. BUT the translation from one language to another ist not an easy task and should not be made -IMO- so perfectly (1:1 word translation), because of the cultural differences between US.

Best regards
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 08, 2014, 11:39:24 AM
Hallo forest,
you have the spirit and the vision!!
I speak Spanish fluently as my mother tong (and other 6 languages) so I did give you my own interpretation of what I read in the original patents.
hanon did an excellent ACADEMIC translation. He was very precise. BUT the translation from one language to another ist not an easy task and should not be made -IMO- so perfectly (1:1 word translation), because of the cultural differences between US.

Best regards
NMS


Thank You ! I know I'm asking a big favour but can you and hanon join to prepare translations with all possible rational interpretations or troublesome sentences ? I'm not sure how to do that but just maybe some tricky words in all possible translations (I mean all having sense there ) in brackets ? It is a big flaw of description of Figuera genrators that we have no 100% sure description of both principle and embodiment details.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 08, 2014, 11:59:07 AM
...
...can you and hanon join to prepare translations with all possible rational interpretations or troublesome sentences ?
...

It needs not only a good command of the language but you have to be 'at home' in the technical background of the topic too.  This is what a translator should combine, or it is fortunate if  both the language and the expertise are present.  Add to this requirement the always problematic  and often special  'patent language' and the fact that the era was more than a 100 years earlier.  This forum enviroment may help to join and add forces.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 12:16:05 PM
NMS,


what is the software application you are using to generate the PCB layouts?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 12:30:18 PM
I agree absolutely  with you Gyula, it’s like cracking or decompiling some hex code written by others  :(

Even for the English people, reading an original English patent isn’t an easy task, because they are written to cause that sensation of ambiguity but at the same time to give the inventor the possibility to protect his work and that is also correct.

As I said the translation done by hanon is excellent, but we should maybe make some “tweaking” to make it readable for us today.
I will try to comment the hanon´s works if he gives me his permission to do so. or we can just comment online what is not understandable.

@bajac,
I use Sprint-layout 6 from abacom:
http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 12:46:37 PM
NMS,


Thanks for your response. But, I also wanted to ask you, how easy is this application to use? I tried a similar application before and it was not user's friendly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 01:07:06 PM
it is the simplest one and very convenient for what we are doing hier!
in youtube you can find some tutorials to speed up the learning curve.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 08, 2014, 07:35:39 PM
Hanon,


I have thought a lot about why Figuera's patents look so incomplete. Were these patents tampered with after filing? Patent #30378 reads "...for this generator whose form and arrangements are shown in the attached drawings, ....and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink..." Was there more than one page of drawings? Where is the thick red line representing the secondary coils?


It is very suspicious!!!

Hi all,

First I really feel very happy after watching the forum response to the new enthusiam injected by NMS. I am really glad for the collaborative side of this forum and I have noted that many people keep on flowing this thread although sometimes may seem to be idle. Many people is folling this thread because we know of the potential of this device. Soon or later we will change the world. I will kile to help more with the test but my equipment and knowledge is very limited.

NMS, You are free and welcome to improve my traslation. For taht reason I kept in the pdf files the original spanish text, in order to avoid loosing those details in possible future translations. If you get a finer translation please send them to me for uploading and updating those in the website www.alpoma.net

About the question from Bajac the 1902 patents:

I went twice to the Archive of the Spanish Patent Office. I could get the patent 30376,30377 and 30378 which were not yet into the public (previously just 30375 and 44267 (the one form year 1908 were public). Those patent were very damaged by humidity (you can see it in the drawings) that the clerks in the archive did not let me to scan it. I could open the documents, read them and make pictures of them. You may order by email a scan of any historical patent  to the Archive and they send it to you by email  but They don´t scan those damaged patents, so I had to go there to look for some pictures by myself. Even in one of them I was advised by the clerk to not to open it. As I was sat in a far corner from the clerk and he was sat oriented to the other side of the room I did not make any case of his statement and I opened it to make the pictures... All for the betterment of this world. I confess that some sheets were really damaged and I broke some edges slightly during my work. But as a counterpart now we have that info to share it and IMPLEMENTED!!

Figuera filed 4 patents in 1902. Four days after filing them we have a telegram published into a newspapers where he stated that he had sold the patent to an international banker union.

In the patent attached files I could find that originally there were no more drawings than those we have. In the patent data base it is written the number of drawing: 1 drawing or 0 drawing, but noone with  2 drawing. Also in this patent database it is written the number of copies provided by the the author during the filing. In all cases Figuera gave 2 copies of each patent.

But in the files there is now just one copy of all of them, except for the patent 30375 that the file contains the two refereed copies. In the case of patent 30378 were the "reddish ink to mark the induced wire" is missing I have always wonder if the second copy would have drawn that line. I don´t know what happen to the second copy.

One month or so after filing the patent it is published in the Patent Office Official Bulletin that Figuera  was requested to correct some formal requirement into the patent text. The patent were noted to have some details missing (as polarities, wire connections or even the scale of the drawing missing). Figuera were advice to correct those formal requirements in certain period of time.

As he did not correct those details the patent were cancelled. The cancellation appeared in another  publication of the bulletin. I didn´t realeased this info until now because this is the proper kind of info that non-believers use to attach. Please note that Figuera did make many public demostrations and he had many witnesses of his generator. He was a high reputed man of his time. Non-believers: the cancellation was just consequence of not correcting the formal details, not because as you will be saying that the patent validity

I thought for myself that as Figuera had sold those patent he had no more intention to keep them in force, so maybe he refused to correct those requirements.

What it is really true is that after selling the patent there were 6 years where there is no mention to Figuera. He stopped appearing in news papers and nobody else keep on talking about his system. I am afraid he was forced to keep silence

He just filed his 1908 patent one or two weeks before his death. I think he wanted to leave his legacy with this patent. If he was about to die maybe he did not take care of the prior non-diclosure agreement that maybe he signed with his good friend the bankers, those who undertook his invention from the world.....Always the same history.... Now In Spain we have a 25% of unemployment due to our crisis (created just by the bankers and the politicians...


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 08, 2014, 08:03:58 PM
Hanon: Many thanks for your brilliant detective work.
I have a couple of questions.
In the UK copies of patents are held in Reference libraries up and down the country.
Is there a chance that there may be better copies in the Spanish reference library system?
In the UK there are also technical journals in the library system.
Is there a chance that there are old Spanish technical journals  dealing with Figuerea's inventions?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 11:59:22 PM
Hanon,


THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT INFORMATION!!! It is really educational.


I think if you release all information including the bulletins, there will be more people involved trying to solve the Figuera's puzzle.


Even though a patent represents a protection of an intellectual property, it is treated like any other property deeds. Once sold, Figuera no longer had any legal authority to answer to the Patent Office Actions. It is clear that from the beginning the true intention of the Bankers was to just let the invention die.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2014, 12:18:42 AM
Hanon: Many thanks for your brilliant detective work.
I have a couple of questions.
In the UK copies of patents are held in Reference libraries up and down the country.
Is there a chance that there may be better copies in the Spanish reference library system?
In the UK there are also technical journals in the library system.
Is there a chance that there are old Spanish technical journals  dealing with Figuerea's inventions?

Hi,

You have to realize that we are talking about a time in the first years at the begining of the 20th century. As far as I know there are not more copies of this patents apart for the Official Historical Archive in the Patent Office.

In that time the patents were handwritten. For the first time I am publishing here the pictures taken from the patent 30378 (Figuera Generator) (year 1902). You can note the current state of the sheets.

Also I attach here the clipping from the Official Bulletin (Boletin Oficial de Propiedad Industrial, BOPI) with the formal  requirements that were not fulfilled by Figuera. Requirements: the objective of the patent is not clearly described, the scale in the drawing is missing, the ownership conditions and the novelty must be explicitly stated.

I hope you can enjoy this documents, at least at historical notes. I haven´t disclosed it till now because they are not technical documents.

For all the translations of the patents and other historical notes about Figuera please look into this site: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 09, 2014, 05:08:27 PM
Has anyone built this exactly as drawn in the patent/s yet? No deviations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 09, 2014, 05:34:24 PM
Hallo Hanon,
thank you for the your dedication and for the help you are giving to the community.
I am working in the document, tying to make it understandable as much as I can.

BTW, I was expecting some more reaction to the artwork I uploaded, but...In order to give you something to think about it:

Quote
PRINCIPIO DE LA INVENCIÓN
    Puesto que todos sabemos que los efectos que se manifiestan cuando un circuito cerrado se aproxima y se aleja de un centro magnético son los mismos que cuando, estando quieto e inmóvil este circuito, el campo magnético dentro del cual está colocado ganando y perdiendo en intensidad; y puesto que toda variación que por cualquiera causa, se produzca en el flujo que atraviese a un circuito es motivo de producción de corriente eléctrica
inducida, se pensó en la posibilidad de construir una máquina que funcionara,
no según el principio de movimiento, como lo hacen las actuales dinamos, sino según el principio de aumento y disminución, o sea de variación del poder del campo magnético, o de la corriente eléctrica que lo produce..

“…For the first time in the patent, he revealed the option used in his invention:
Creating induced current by changing the flux density using a variable excitation current.  as simple as that!, by doing that, you create or destroy the lines of flux making then to move closer or wider from each other's, this movement cut the coil winding!” => you need the best core materials to get the best electromagnet …lamination with high permeability ...nothing new for us..

Then you have to find the CONVENIENT position for the collecting coil or the induced=> just look at PEAKS in the AC curve ;) do you see how are the 2 B´s??

You will find more in the document, once is over.

Hi Doug1,
That is my intention (IMO, that should be the first step, and then playing with 3 coils). I am working on the commutator right now.

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2014, 08:55:55 PM

Creating induced current by changing the flux density using a variable excitation current.  as simple as that!, by doing that, you create or destroy the lines of flux making then to move closer or wider from each other's, this movement cut the coil winding!

One thought I have been digesting is that the system , as difference with a transformer, has two magnetic fields. When both fields are equal (I1 = I2) both have the same intensity and they create a perfect link between them: all the lines of forces cross from one side to the other along the collecting coil. But when one field increases and the other decreases I think that this link is broken and the lines of force are not crossing the collecting coil anymore but they must go other site and thus they cut the winding. I posted an sketch in page 27 at the bottom. Maybe you want to go there to have a look.

It is just an idea trying to answer the question: Why did Figuera required two electromagnets, one at each side, with different magnetic fields instead of havinghat the same field?

I have found this video. Does someone know what it is explained? It seem a basic Figuera coil configuration
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rIlTB4orFZ4 (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rIlTB4orFZ4)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on February 09, 2014, 11:30:42 PM
Welcome MNS!

 Doug 1,

I am attempting to build the "old school" device with few changes. It is difficult to build a commutator
like a barrel like Mr Figuera, so I built one on a flat plane like the drawing shows. Since I was using
a 1800 RPM motor, I decided to increase the contacts to 32. Sounds simple enough but the amount of
connections and wires are confusing to say the least. I do not recommend this. If I don't get it sorted
out soon, I will build another with 16.
Anyway, I have four sets of transformers. I am having trouble right now getting the wiring for them and
the resistor to do what I wanted them to do. So far no good results. Also, I just found out that the
wiring diagram I had printed from the Internet wasn't correct and had the connections to the
transformers wrong.
I will keep everyone up to date it I have any success.

Thanks,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Artoj on February 10, 2014, 12:35:56 PM
Hi All

I think Figuera made his patent vague enough so you could not copy his work and broad enough to cover a multitude of configurations, this is the writing and drawing of someone keen on both protecting his work and misleading its true configuration. We can all use our expertise, just as 100's of others have done to make different versions, alas I can only add another version myself. We are confronted by the fallacy of words against the engineering reality. I have added a few simple switches that can reconfigure some of the vagueness to concrete possibilities  Regards Arto

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 10, 2014, 06:08:41 PM
Please bear with me on this and read on.  :) I'm posting because I am interested, not to try to dissuade anyone.

Not sure if anyone has noted or mentioned this but Tesla's patent for the Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy - was issued 1901 November 5,
and the patent for Method of Utilizing of Radiant Energy - 1901 November 5.

Now both these patents pre date Figuera's patent, and so it makes sense to me that Figuera may well have used the atmospheric or radiant energy collector to gather the energy to power the device, but could not possibly patent that part because Tesla already did it, it is even possible that Tesla heard of Figuera's plan and intuitively knew what he was doing and so hurriedly filed the patent first even though he likely thought of the principal many years before. Figuera's patent is 1902, very close to the same time and due to Tesla already patenting the general idea of getting energy from the atmosphere, Figuera was left only with the "rotary switched inverter" apparatus to patent which could be used to generate AC electricity from the energy gained from the collector.

It is just one possibility that makes sense as the patent shows a positive and negative input and it describes an exciting current from an external source. Although.

The parts in bold in the paragraph below don't really make sense. Firstly if the current does not return to the generator there is no current loop and so it would not even work without that happening, so the current returning to the generator means little to nothing. Secondly if the feeding current was just removed then the current loop would need to be connected back to itself to maintain a current loop, and as well the 'output power as the result of the initial feeding current' would need to be more power in real Watts than the "input power" related to the feeding current.
One thing is for sure, and that is if a switch was opened to disconnect the feeding current the current loop would be broken and the operation would cease very quickly. This leaves two options the input was shorted to itself or a battery or other source of potential was left connected. No current will flow without a closed loop, unless through displacement current as in a capacitor and that only works with AC. Thirdly if the device did in fact produce more output than input and could work with no input then it would surely continue to increase the system energy until destruction. He seems to be claiming that the returning of the current means it will keep working with no further input. I don't think the entire story is told. If I genuinely thought it could work I would surely try to build one, and if someone does in fact end up looping one I will eat my hat on video and apologize. I think it possible he could start it with a battery then use the collector to continue it's working.

Quote
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted.  From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.
   

Something doesn't add up. But I would say that if the initial power source is removed and the current loop was broken by the feed wires not connected together, there would be no more current and it would definitely cease to work.

He does claim it can be done somehow in this patent http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf 1908 though he is not clear on how to remove the feeding current supply. I read it that he claims it runs itself.

Quote
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns
to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be
a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if
wanted. From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.

 

However in this patent 1902 http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf  he makes no such claim but states this.
Quote
The driving current, or is
an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign
alternately by any known method, or is a part of the total current of the
generator, as it is done today in the current dynamos
.

Anyway good luck, and I hope to taste my hat soon.  :D

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 11, 2014, 03:33:48 AM
Anyone know how old Figuera was when he died ?

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 11, 2014, 03:04:09 PM
Figuera was 68 years-old when he died in november 1908.
 
He was still working as engineer for the Spanish government, but all this research was done in his spare time, not related to his job for the State
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 11, 2014, 09:03:24 PM
Hallo,
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Please make some +&- operation and share your opinion.

Hi Farmhand,
nice to see your post.
IMO, the switch you mentioned  is a commutator (the second one controlled by the motor, witch not appears in the patents, because it was a common method), it has the function of converting the AC to DC.
like the one you find in the DC motors but it is used in reveres mode, the brushes rotate to get DC from the statistic output coil for the self-looping.

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 11, 2014, 09:06:07 PM
credits for the picture goes hier:
http://www.todocoleccion.net/madrid-1867-retrato-clemente-figuera-ustariz-fotografia-alonso-martinez-hermano~x27627520
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 11, 2014, 09:19:18 PM
Hi Arto,
I like your drawings!
but i dont see the looping back.
did you made that commutator/potis?
Thanks!

NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Artoj on February 12, 2014, 12:52:08 AM
Thanks NMS
I find most patent drawings misleading and sometimes incorrect. This is usually done so it is hard to copy, I redraw the patent so it is a step closer to engineering reality, which means I could build it and test the patent holders assertions about validity. I have been able to discover a lot about the nature of the deception or about the underlying designs, any which way is a step closer to knowing how something is supposed to work. I try to make it easier for others to find their answers, regards Arto.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 07:10:55 AM
Hallo,
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Please make some +&- operation and share your opinion.

Hi Farmhand,
nice to see your post.
IMO, the switch you mentioned  is a commutator (the second one controlled by the motor, witch not appears in the patents, because it was a common method), it has the function of converting the AC to DC.
like the one you find in the DC motors but it is used in reveres mode, the brushes rotate to get DC from the statistic output coil for the self-looping.

Regards,
NMS

EDIT: Actually the drawing does show the device is permanently looped, I think, my bad. Except for the one position it is shown in ?

If we turn the commutator one position, then the current loop goes from the commutator to the north coils then from the north coils to the south coils then back to the commutator and through the resistors back to where we started from.

Cheers

P.S What do you mean by the 90 degrees thing ?
Quote
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Do you mean 90 degrees phase difference between voltage and current at the output ?

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 08:00:33 AM
I think it needs to tried exactly how it is drawn ! Even if only with one set of coils, three coils, one north, one south and one induced. A resistor board a commutator and a battery to start it.


Maybe a good idea to use a separate battery just to run the commutator so as to keep it at a constant speed. I don't think there is any need to worry about the power the commutator consumes. I think that can be overlooked for now.
..

If I am the first one to make it work do I get a let off on the hat eating.  ;D

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 08:31:59 AM
To save some time has anyone worked out a resistor scheme for 12 volts input or done a series of drawings of current paths for each commutator position ? Anyone come up with a quick and nasty commutator design ?

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 09:52:25 AM
OK that's a slightly confusing setup, I was forgetting the resistor array is a constant loop.  :-[

I've got a series of pictures of all commutator positions and with the resistors that are bypassed marked. Now i'll try to work out a resistor scheme for 12 volts.

I have an idea or two for a commutator.

Cheers

OK I've read the patent two or three times and I've got a visual of how it would work with the battery in place, one brush that is in contact with two "contacts" at any time and the positive is connected to the brush which turns around the cylinder. The resistor array acts as a splitter so that the north and south magnets get a varying current ect.

But the thing for me is that the demonstration that was done was related to the other guys patents in 1910 and I would need to believe the output could sustain the resistive losses in the input side, as well as the feeding current and give output also. I just cannot believe the output could be more than the input.

We ought to be able to just feed it out of phase sine waves in this day and age, then use the extra output to power the sine wave generator and do away with the resistor array, brush and commutator setup.. 

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 13, 2014, 09:21:15 AM
Hi all,
 
I have found an interesting patent about the implementation of a dynamo into a motionless device (US5926083) by Asaoka based on changing the flux density of an open magnetic path. It requires an air-gap and a permanent magnet. I don´t know if this patent may have any relation with Figuera´s design but I think it will be worth to attach it  here for someone interested.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Artoj on February 13, 2014, 05:30:21 PM
Hi Farmhand,  now you know why I redrew the patent, you must get past the fact he doesn't explain the engineering details at all, just vague notions. Looks like you understand his basic design, its is all in my picture, no need to strain your head trying to figure out Figuera, I've drawn the figures, LOL :) regards Arto

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 13, 2014, 08:18:08 PM
If we apply alternating current to a permanent magnet, the magnet will lose its magnetism in no time. Of course if you apply milliamps and millivolts it might not happen. These models are good for table top demonstrations. Not for industrial applications.

The US Patent cited is not related to the Figuera concept. The Figuera patent and design are totally different and use electromagnets. I have built a modified version of the Figuera device and it actually produces greater output than the input power. On the problem of self sustaining it I have not achieved yet but it can be done. No law of physics is violated here. The first self sustaining generator was built probably by McFarland and then by Tesla in 1890. It was a DC design and so he kept quiet. Figuera, Hubbard and Hendershot are the others and of which we have information only on Figuera thanks to the efforts of Hanon. The device works. I'm a patent Attorney and I read a lot of patents and when time and money are available I also do some research. I can confirm that we built an exact replica of Figuera and it did not work and then we modified it and the device worked perfectly well in that the output current was far higher than the input. 1540 watts input. 12600 watts output at no load. Interesting thing is output is 630 volts and 20 amps at no load. I will need to take an electrical engineer and custom built a transformer to step down the voltage and then see if it can be tested to see if the amperage wattage shown is real. Until then let me keep quiet.

I'm not an electrical engineer and am really surprised that most of the people have missed the importance of his 1902 patents which he sold for a lot of money at that time..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on February 14, 2014, 03:13:20 PM
To all,
I am giving up on the 32 pin electrical controller and making a 16 pin rotary.
I could not get both the plus and minus magnets to work. I plan to run the
16 pin controller at 1800 rpm to check things out then build a 1 to 2 ratio
pulley to get the 3600 rpm that should give me a 60 Htz sign wave. I will be
on track to build to the original design.

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 09:44:42 AM
To Farmhand and Shadow:

You are off the mark.. What is the purpose of the rotary device..To create an interrupted or alternating current that will change signs when it moves from one point to another point.. When your mains supply is already alternating current the rotary device today is not needed and remove the rotary device and the resistor setup and just feed directly from the mains.. That way you get sign wave and 50 Hz or 60 Hz current automatically. Figuera did not disclose the best method of carrying out the invention and so he disclosed a weakest method of carrying out the invention. His disclosure substantially hides one important point. Both the primary electromagnets must be of equal strength for the device to work best. They should not be of weaker compared to one another. Of course his set up made the two electromagnets alternately stronger and weaker and we did not test that but in our tests we got the best results only when both the primary electromagnets are of equal strength.

Simply this is an amplifying transformer. Two step down transformers  acting as primary electromagnets set up in such a way that the opposite poles of the two are facing each other and in that place you place another secondary of many turns to step up the voltage. Then what you get is both amperage and voltage increase. In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that.

The set up is NS - NS - NS  The bolded outer electromagnets are the step down transformers where the secondary is placed near the core and the primary of many turns and preferably bifilar or trifilar or quadfilar is wound upon it. I used Quadfilar primary. Secondarly is a single wire. In the middle electromagnet you increase the number of turns many times and many layers. In all I used about 1300 meters of 4 sq mm wire out of which about 500 meters were primary and 800 meters were secondary. The electromagnets were built on a plastic tube 4 inches in diameter and 18 inches length. We used soft iron rods to create the electromagnets. 3 such devices were placed in the NS-NS-NS configuration. That is all that is needed to test and verify the results. This device works.

However be careful. When you give 220 volts electricity the electromagnets take about 7 amps but the output is really dangerous 630 volts and 20 amps output..You may get more or less depending on the number of turns and depending on the input voltage.

This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true. If you use the output of the first module to feed the second module and the output of the second module to feed the third module you are going to get increasing voltage and amperage. Any one can test it and see the results themselves. But be extremely careful as the resulting voltages are deadly as the amperage also is very high.

Making the device self sustaining is of no problem really. The output is high voltage and higher amperage. Secondary current will flow in the direction opposing the primary current. When you provide a step down transformer to use the electricity, the output of the step down transformer will flow in a direction oppising the feeding secondary current. So the output of the transformer will be in phase and synchronise with the primary input. Now all you need is a make before break change over switch and change the source of feeding current to the output of the transformer. A part of the transformer output is enough to keep the unit running. Rest of the transformer output is given to load. The original feeding current is removed and the system will continue to work. I have not done this part. But I think given this information any number of posters here can replicate the results.

If you use this in an Electric car, the car can run any amount of distance. Only thing is that we need to convert the AC output to pulsed DC output to run a DC motor or may be use a capacitor to make it a perfect DC current to run it. A Battery, an inverter and this set up and then converting to pulsed DC through a bridge rectifier and then a capacitor to make it perfect DC is all that is needed. May be use a solar panel to keep the battery charged. Since the battery would be used only at the starting time, it will not diminish and in any case the alternator present in the car will keep charging the battery.  This is an extremely simple device really and I do not know how you people who are all experienced electrical engineers have missed the mark.

Let me see comments that will call all this a mirage. But do test it yourself and check the results before calling my results bad..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 15, 2014, 10:41:59 AM


This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true.


I hope the Thuth guides you. I always think in the 3000 million people without access to electricity in our world..

Best wishes
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 10:54:50 AM
Regarding the question as to how the output is higher than the input, the answer is simple. The secondary placed in the middle is not subject to Lenz law. Please see the exception to Lenz law here from wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz's_law#Conservation_of_momentum

When the induced electricity is created due to the interactions between two opposing poles, Lenz law does not apply. In other words the charges are opposite charges and the force is one of magnetic attraction and not magnetic repulsion. The voltage would continue to increase until it reaches the other pole. The amperge will remain the same and then the voltage will continue to increase in the second electromagnet as well. So in the result we get a much higher voltage and higher amperage output due to this set up.

If we are to compare this, if we are cycling uphill a lot of effort is needed to go up but if we are going downhill, no effort is needed except that we need to use brakes to reduce the increasing accleration of the cycle.

Many have also missed the fact that the secondary is placed also inside the primary to increase the amperage. If you do not place the secondary inside the primary as a step down setup you end up wasting that part of the electromagnet. This is present in only one line of the Buforn patent spanish versions. Buforn calls it is needed to get industrial level currents. That is only in one line.

The device uses a low input current and the rotary device which creates sparks. The function of sparks is to increase the frequency of the current and hence increase the voltage of the inducing current. If you want to test this, connect a lamp to your mains through a wire. Make a part of the wire open and use the tester to touch and tap the open wire to create mild sparks. See the voltmeter and the when the sparks come the voltage will shoot up. So the rotary device essentially created mini sparks and increased the voltage of the inducing current really. Again we do not need it today as we get 220 or 230 volt or 115 volt AC supplies today in almost all places.

Again regarding the law of conservation of energy, Buforn asks the interesting question where is the electricity coming from? A permanet magnet does not create any current. But when it is made to rotate and a coil of wire is palced around the rotating magnet, electricity is generated. What is the source of that electricity..Buforn answers that as the magnet interacts with the solar and cosmic radiations which continuously bombard Earth and give the energy to the earth to rotate. The rotating magnet interacts with the magnetic field of earth and acts as a focusing point and generates electricity in the coil. Read that part and that is very interesting. This is exactly in line with what Don Smith has claimed. This is open system that takes electricity from the atmosphere and the total energy of the system remains constant and the law of conservation of energy is not violated. Actually all energy producing systems are open systems but they are built and designed in such a way to work like isolated systems and it is these designs that are responsible for the wrong notions. Without access to atmosphere, no device can produce electricity. If you think about it all generators have access to or open to the atmosphere.

I have tested this by covering a transformer with copper plates on all sides and placed a copper plate beneath it and then covered it with layers of plastic and the transformer refuses to work. I have built devices where even the primary current will not go. Nothing in the secondary if no air is present and the device is covered fully like this..

Possibly I'm not an electrical engineer and have not learnt the electrical engineering subject in the proper way and so I ended up testing and finding these things to be correct. I strongly suggest that you test the NS-NS-NS setup as I have built check the results for yourself and then criticize me..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 11:52:40 AM
Thanks Hanon:

I appreciate your thoughts on the millions of people without access to Electricity.

Only due to lack of knowledge, effort and money  people remain without electricity. Read Teslas patent on generating electricity using radiant energy. I will post some picture or video on generating electricity for free any where in the world in significant amount to light your own home. It is certainly doable. The problem is we can share knowledge. Effort and money has to be there to light the world. That is where big corporations score and they certainly are entitled to get the returns on their investment. All we can do is to share knowledge. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 15, 2014, 12:25:55 PM
NRamaswami

Thank you very much for your contribution.
Your posts make much sense to me (not EE also)
This quadrifilar primary you mentioned is (Tesla) series, or 4 insulated wires winded & connected in parallel ?

regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 01:26:51 PM
Thanks for the good words..I actually did not expect to see good words on my posts..

Quadfilar wire is wound like this..

All wires run in parallel. End of first wire is connected to beginning of second. End of second connected to beginning of third and end of third connected to beginning of fourth wire. Input given to beginning of first wire and taken out at the end of fourth wire. I do not know how it is described in the Electrical engineering terminology..

Quadfiliar is primary.

First wind a single wire as a step down component and upon that wind the quadfilar primary. 

The components are like this NS - NS - NS Opposite poles always face each other in this set up. It can be SN-SN-SN as well.

The output from the first primary electromagnet goes to the input of the third electromagnet the second electromagnet acting only as a step up secondary. All three secondaries are connected in series to increase the voltage and amperage.

Results can be replicated and verified easily by any one..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 01:26:55 PM
Quote
Making the device self sustaining is of no problem really. The output is high voltage and higher amperage. Secondary current will flow in the direction opposing the primary current. When you provide a step down transformer to use the electricity, the output of the step down transformer will flow in a direction oppising the feeding secondary current. So the output of the transformer will be in phase and synchronise with the primary input. Now all you need is a make before break change over switch and change the source of feeding current to the output of the transformer. A part of the transformer output is enough to keep the unit running. Rest of the transformer output is given to load. The original feeding current is removed and the system will continue to work. I have not done this part. But I think given this information any number of posters here can replicate the results.

I think that you, like many others, pretend to teach what you actually do not know.

If it is "no problem really" to make the device self-sustaining, why have you not done this part? I know why... it is because it is more of a problem than you seem to think, and that YOU CANNOT DO IT.

In other words, you are making claims you cannot support with real data, outside checkable references, facts and calculations, demonstrations of your own.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 01:29:00 PM
Quote
Without access to atmosphere, no device can produce electricity. If you think about it all generators have access to or open to the atmosphere.

Now you are just being silly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 01:52:10 PM
Very well. we will try and post the results but I'm short of cash and we will do it. But I certainly cannot claim any credit for it even if we achive it. 

I suggest that you replicate the experiment and see if the results tally.

Regarding the self sustaining claim, check the patents on Amplidyne a device used extensively during world war II in US and British Navy ships.

If you cannot find the patents let me know and let me post them. In these devices the original current was maintained not removed. But for every watt of feedback current, the output increased by 20000 watts as the patents which are granted indicate.

The point to note is if the feedback current voltage is higher than the original input current, the original current would not go and there is no need for it. This is not theory. This is why Figuera has used a low voltage initial source and the feedback was higher voltage. At that point of time the original current is not needed as it would not go in. To do this all we need to do is build multiple modules and then connect the higher feedback to the original point with low voltage input.

If Radio amplification is doable and agreeable, energy amplification is also practical. This has been done in Amplidyne devices. Same principle was used by Figuera.  I'm sure you would agree if the initial current is not removed, the source of that current can be continuously energised by the output current. Is it not a self sustaining machine then?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 01:57:33 PM
Regarding the silly claim part.. I suggest that you take a small transformer. Place copper sheets and plastic sheets beneath it and cover it on sides with copper sheets and then plastic sheets. Insulate it except for the input and output wires.. See if the transformer works and produces current in the secondary.. Why call me silly when you have done the experiment..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:02:47 PM
Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy.

Generators work just fine in total vacuums. Wrapping a transformer completely in copper won't prevent it from working. You've made several statements that are simply total BS. "Self-sustaining" around here means that you can remove _all_ input sources of _energy_ and the device continues to operate. The Amplidyne is not self-sustaining and does not produce more ENERGY output than input. Neither does any device from Figuera. Neither does any device you can demonstrate.

Please stop posting utter fictions and distortions of reality. Please stop pretending to "teach" what you yourself do not know. If you make a claim, like your "generators don't work unless they have access to the atmosphere", that contradicts what we all know, then you really should provide some evidence that supports your claims. But of course you cannot.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:07:31 PM
Regarding the silly claim part.. I suggest that you take a small transformer. Place copper sheets and plastic sheets beneath it and cover it on sides with copper sheets and then plastic sheets. Insulate it except for the input and output wires.. See if the transformer works and produces current in the secondary.. Why call me silly when you have done the experiment..

I have transformers all around me that are completely encased in metal and plastic and they work just fine. Would you like to see photographs of them? This "experiment" is performed millions of times every day, by all the sealed, completely encased transformers in the world.  I challenge YOU to provide proof of this claim. Let's see your "experiment" where you do as you say. There is absolutely no empirical or theoretical support for your claim... so YOU are the one who needs to do the experiment and show your results so that they can be examined to find your ERROR.

Further, let's see you demonstrate your claim about generators and the atmosphere. That should be loads of fun. I'm sure NASA will be distressed to hear that their spacecraft power plants, waaaaay out there in space distant from all atmospheres, cannot generate electricity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:09:46 PM
1. I'm not teaching any thing for I have made it clear that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.

2. What I have posted are results obtained and that can be verified and can be replicated by any one.

3. I do concede that I have not tested the self sustaining part. There is nothing to hide. The output voltage and amperage is very high and cannot be done without help from a trained Electrical Engineer. Safety first for me.

4. Space ships use only solar arrays and Nuclear materials based thermionic batteries. They can easily carry a powerful alternator..Why don't they do it?

Results that I stated are verifiable and replicatable by any one..Do the experiment and then shout me down..if the results are not there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:20:19 PM
You mix things up..

I said Transformers covered with copper sheets all around. Then plastic sheets placed on copper sheets. 

All transformers are made up of magnetising metals. Without iron transformers would not work. When transformers are covered by copper plates in the way I described they do not work. Your statement is transformers covered with metals. All transformers we see are covered with metals to dissipate heat but they are not copper but magnetisable metals.  My statement is non magnetic copper sheet covered by non magnetic non metallic plastic. Please post pictures of transformers fully covered with copper working fine..

In my experiments I have found that if we make the magnet very powerful current simply refuses to go to load. If the magnet is very powerful it simply eats the electricity given to it. I suggest that you wind a quadfilar coil around plastic tube of 4 inch diameter and wrap on that another plastic sheet and iron rods and then continue the winding in this fashion and after about 18 layers complete the quadfilar winding. Try to send the current through the quadfilar winding to a load and see if the load is able to get any power..

Zero.

Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it. I do not know why it happens. This is a result you can replicate easily.

I do not intend to teach any thing to any one. I'm just sharing the results of my experiments. Nothing more. If I have not done any thing, there is truthful admission that I'm yet to do it..I suggest that you replicate the experiments and then tell me please..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:26:10 PM
1. I'm not teaching any thing for I have made it clear that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.
It is perfectly clear that you are not an Electrical Engineer. It is also perfectly clear that you are trying to impart knowledge that you _believe_ you have, to others who you think don't have that knowledge. Please look up the definition of "Teach".
Quote
2. What I have posted are results obtained and that can be verified and can be replicated by any one.

Where is the replication of your claim about wrapping a transformer in copper? Where is the demonstration that a generator will not work in a vacuum? Nowhere.
Quote
3. I do concede that I have not tested the self sustaining part. There is nothing to hide. The output voltage and amperage is very high and cannot be done without help from a trained Electrical Engineer. Safety first for me.
There are plenty of people who can handle high voltage and amperage safely. I am one of them. You cannot provide any proof of any self-sustaining electrical device, and the reason has nothing to do with high voltages or currents.
Quote
4. Space ships use only solar arrays and Nuclear materials based thermionic batteries. They can easily carry a powerful alternator..Why don't they do it?
Because something has to turn the alternator, or provide the force to drive linear alternators. It's simpler and cheaper at present to use solar arrays, but there are Stirling-cycle driven linear alternators operating in space as well. Do a little research!
Quote
Results that I stated are verifiable and replicatable by any one..Do the experiment and then shout me down..if the results are not there.

Show me one single "replication" of your claim that wrapping a transformer in sheets of plastic and copper will make it stop working. Let's see your own demonstration of this. I want to know exactly how to wrap, because I have transformers, copper, and plastic, and I know how to make the necessary measurements. So when I see your demonstration, I'll repeat it and report my findings. Or, if you have some exact specifications as to the transformer, the copper, the plastic, the measurements you made.... please report them here.

You are making claims that are outrageous, and you cannot support them with real data. So far, anyway. What is preventing you from providing references that support your claims? What is preventing you from demonstrating that you might know what you are talking about? I know.... and so do you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:32:18 PM
"Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy."

This is your statement.. Pray tell me then what is Energy?

Amplidyne devices produced more output than input. It is in the patents. Patents that are granted. Devices that are used in US Navy and UK Navy ships during world war II.  They claim that every 1 watt of positive feedback the device produced up to 20000 watts of excess output. This is similar to sound amplification only.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:36:16 PM
You mix things up..

I said Transformers covered with copper sheets all around. Then plastic sheets placed on copper sheets. 

Show me. Make a dimensioned drawing, showing the exact placement of plastic and copper, and give the details of your measurements. Show some outside reference that supports your claim. Tell us why completely metal-sealed transformers still work, but magic copper and plastic makes them not work.
Quote

All transformers are made up of magnetising metals. Without iron transformers would not work.

False. Utterly and easily demonstrably false. There are dozens of people laughing at you right now, because they, like me, all have transformers working that contain no iron, no magnetizing metals at all.

Quote

When transformers are covered by copper plates in the way I described they do not work.

Also false. Demonstrate the validity of this remarkable claim by showing your experimental work.

Quote
Your statement is transformers covered with metals. All transformers we see are covered with metals to dissipate heat but they are not copper but magnetisable metals.  My statement is non magnetic copper sheet covered by non magnetic non metallic plastic. Please post pictures of transformers fully covered with copper working fine..

You are being really really silly. YOU are making the claim that copper and plastic (what kind of plastic? I laugh...) will stop a transformer from working. Many people want to see YOUR demonstration of this. Why do you not show it? I know why: your "experiment" is an error.

Quote

In my experiments I have found that if we make the magnet very powerful current simply refuses to go to load. If the magnet is very powerful it simply eats the electricity given to it.


More utter ignorant BS. Now you have more people than just me, laughing at you.

Quote

I suggest that you wind a quadfilar coil around plastic tube of 4 inch diameter and wrap on that another plastic sheet and iron rods and then continue the winding in this fashion and after about 18 layers complete the quadfilar winding. Try to send the current through the quadfilar winding to a load and see if the load is able to get any power..

Zero.
Come on, demonstrate! It is up to YOU to provide demonstrations of your ridiculous claims.

Quote

Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it. I do not know why it happens. This is a result you can replicate easily.

I do not intend to teach any thing to any one. I'm just sharing the results of my experiments. Nothing more. If I have not done any thing, there is truthful admission that I'm yet to do it..I suggest that you replicate the experiments and then tell me please..

You have shown nothing. You have made several claims that are utter fantasies. When... or rather IF... you  yourself are able to demonstrate the validity of any of your claims, that will be the time for others to try to "replicate" them.

"Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it."

That gets a ROFL, for sure.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:42:49 PM
Many thanks for accepting at least one of my statements that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.

I used a ready made 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer to do the experiment. It did not work when covered in the way I indicated.

The other large 18 layer device produced very strong magnetism but the current would not go to the lamps and power them up.

As I said when I time and money are available I do the experiments out of interest. I have tried to replicate the Alfred Hubbard device without success todate. However I do know one thing. The outer 8 coils are wound in this fashion. the first four coils are wound in clockwise direction and the next four coils are wound in ccw direction and only then in all the 8 coils magnetism is produced. Otherwise magnetism is not produced in the last four coils.

I will check your statement on the alternators working in space. My knowledge is limited and I continuously learn.

There is no intention to teach and only intention to share the results.

I strongly suggest that if you can handle high voltages and high amperages, please replicate the experiment of Figuera as described by me. And see the output voltage and amperage. And please be honest with results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:44:38 PM
"Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy."

This is your statement.. Pray tell me then what is Energy?

Amplidyne devices produced more output than input. It is in the patents. Patents that are granted. Devices that are used in US Navy and UK Navy ships during world war II.  They claim that every 1 watt of positive feedback the device produced up to 20000 watts of excess output. This is similar to sound amplification only.

Energy is the ability to perform work. Energy is conserved. Volts, amps, watts: Not conserved, not energy.
Energy is measured in Joules (in the SI system). Amplidyne devices do not produce more _energy_ output than input. Go ahead, take the Amplidyne patents and make something from them that is self-sustaining, or that produces more energy out than in. You cannot.

The WATT is a measure of POWER not energy. I have a device right here -- a transformer that has no iron or any other magnetizable metal in it -- that produces 30,000 Watts output power from only 75 watts input. Why is it not self-sustaining? I know why.

At this point I doubt that you even understand "sound amplification only", if you don't understand the difference between a Watt and a Joule.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:49:48 PM
No problem. give me two weeks time and I will rebuild the device and show the proof live if you want on the powerful magnet stopping the current to go to load.. This looks certainly ridiculous but I'm not able to understand why it happens and this is why I stated this..

I can also show live the results of the figuera device output. But I will reduce the number of turns to reduce the voltage to less than 500. When the voltage is reduced the amperage would also be reduced. But I guarantee that the output is higher than the input..Figuera did not cheat and there was no need for a professor of his calibre to come out with false statements.

I'm not a regular poster and I have a number of clients to serve and when time permits I will rebuild the device and post videos of on youtube and here. It is not a problem.. However if you are regularly in Electrical Engineering I suggest that you also do the experimentation and see if the results are replicated or not..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:50:18 PM
Many thanks for accepting at least one of my statements that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.

I used a ready made 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer to do the experiment. It did not work when covered in the way I indicated.

The other large 18 layer device produced very strong magnetism but the current would not go to the lamps and power them up.

As I said when I time and money are available I do the experiments out of interest. I have tried to replicate the Alfred Hubbard device without success todate. However I do know one thing. The outer 8 coils are wound in this fashion. the first four coils are wound in clockwise direction and the next four coils are wound in ccw direction and only then in all the 8 coils magnetism is produced. Otherwise magnetism is not produced in the last four coils.

I will check your statement on the alternators working in space. My knowledge is limited and I continuously learn.

There is no intention to teach and only intention to share the results.

I strongly suggest that if you can handle high voltages and high amperages, please replicate the experiment of Figuera as described by me. And see the output voltage and amperage. And please be honest with results.

No, I will NOT do your homework for you! I challenge YOU to demonstrate any thing you have claimed.

Here are some of the claims you've made that I would like you to support with demonstrations or references of your own.

-Transformers will not work without iron or other magnetizable core.
-Generators don't work in vacuum.
-No electrical devices work without access to atmosphere.
-Wrapping a transformer in copper and plastic will stop it from working.
-The Amplidyne is self-sustaining and produces more output than input.
-Magnets eat electrical current.
-No current passes through your "18 layer quadrifilar iron rod" whatever device, even though the wire is continuous and not broken somewhere.

They look rather formidable when all gathered together, don't they. Just pick an easy one and demonstrate the validity of your claim.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:55:55 PM
 
Quote
Interesting thing is output is 630 volts and 20 amps at no load. I will need to take an electrical engineer and custom built a transformer to step down the voltage and then see if it can be tested to see if the amperage wattage shown is real. Until then let me keep quiet.

How do you get 20 amps output... if there is no load?

I am afraid you are way over your head here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:56:56 PM
This is actually a punch to me really. Earlier in posts Farmhand has claimed that a device cannot produce more output than input. Now you provide the proof that a device can provide more output than input. Why don't you show a video of your 30000 watts output transformer in youtube video for a 75 watts input..for the benefit of poor souls like me. Since it is your claim you can demonstrate it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 03:08:37 PM
Please check my first post. We got 630 volts and 20 amps in the Ammeter at no load. Since this was way too high for us we stopped. We need to build a transformer to step down the voltage to around 200 volts and then give it to the load lamps to check. Secondly I have had
50 Amps Ammeters burning out after showing 50 amps at no load. I would not believe that there was amps at no load if the Ammeters had not burned out..

The 4 sq mm wire is rated only for 24 amps. So we needed to buy a very expensive transformer and provide safety set ups. The Electrician who participated in this experiment passed away due to illness suddenly. So we kind of stopped all these things for a few months now.  We have also put up a small website www.tmptens.com where we are coming up with a different effort.

I can provide full description and show what we did and send you photos and if need be make videos. If you can handle the high voltages and high amperages, you may try to do the experiment. Given that you describe a very expensive transformer, money may not matter you. If you can replicate the experment please do so. I have funds problem and I will need time to redo all this. I have the wires but I have to hire people and redo the wiring manually. All wires are plastic insulated wires.

None of the statements are false. There is no intent to teach but only an intention to share the results. You can check it yourself and then let me know.  You appear to have access to good funds given your description of your transformer. That is in short supply here at the moment.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 03:16:33 PM
This is actually a punch to me really. Earlier in posts Farmhand has claimed that a device cannot produce more output than input. Now you provide the proof that a device can provide more output than input. Why don't you show a video of your 30000 watts output transformer in youtube video for a 75 watts input..for the benefit of poor souls like me. Since it is your claim you can demonstrate it.
There is nothing special about making more Watts at peak output than input, because POWER IS NOT ENERGY. Ask Farmhand, he has devices too that produce more peak power output than they use as input, by far. He knows that these devices are not overunity and cannot "self sustain" or be "self-looped". Naive measurements -- such as are likely to be performed by patent examiners who are not physicists or electrical engineers -- will see the peak power levels and believe that some "energy" amplification is happening, when actually it is nothing of the sort.

You want to see some video demonstrations of power amplification? You, who mention Tesla's name in your posts? Take a look at my YT channel.

But let's start simple, shall we? Here's a transformer working without any metal, iron or otherwise, in the core or anywhere nearby.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6uQUxC7DS8

So that's one of your silly claims put to rest, right there.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 03:18:46 PM
Regarding your challenge, I can easily take the 18 layer quadfilar test and show it. I don't understand why it happens..But the magnet that is made is very powerful.

I will also demonstrate the Figuera device.

I understand that compared to you my knowledge is very little in this field but the results can be replicated easily. I would appreciate if you show the 75 watts input 30000 watts output transformer in a video to all of us. I would be very obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 15, 2014, 03:43:31 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

Please don't enter in the game initiated by Tinsekoala. This user is the first time that participate into this thread...what a coincidence... You are just sharing your empirical results...if someone don't want to understand this it is not our problem. Just ignore those users...As Don Quixote said :"Dogs are barking, therefore we are getting closer"

Keep on testing and doing a good work, and avoid going into these dirty games

Best regards and good luck!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 03:47:35 PM
If you honestly show your 18-layer thing and your measurements, we can figure out why you are getting the results you think you are getting. I assure you... magnets, no matter how strong, do not "eat" electricity. However a large inductor like you are describing can definitely present a high impedance to an AC power supply, which would prevent a series light bulb from lighting perceptibly under some conditions. Did you measure the current through your device with a proper instrument, or are you simply relying on your visual judgement of the brightness of the bulb? I think I already know the answer to that question.

Now... before we go any further, please acknowledge that you are wrong about transformers requiring iron or magnetizable metal in order to operate.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 03:50:44 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

Please don't enter in the game initiated by Tinsekoala. This user is the first time that participate into this thread...what a coincidence... You are just sharing your empirical results...if someone don't want to understand this it is not our problem. Just ignore those users...As Don Quixote said :"Dogs are barking, therefore we are getting closer"

Keep on testing and doing a good work, and avoid going into these dirty games

Best regards and good luck!!
So then, I guess that user "hanon" also believes that transformers need iron cores to work, that they can be prevented from working by wrapping in copper and plastic, that magnets eat electricity, that an Amplidyne is self sustaining....  but instead of providing evidence, he chooses to attack me personally instead !!

What a hoot you people are. This is better than watching daytime television, for sure!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 04:04:36 PM
I went through your video.. It is an air core Tesla coil. Did you convert the voltage increased to usable power? There is no indication that for 75 watts input that it produced 30000 watts output but I agree that if the voltage increases the amperage should also increase.

Please see this http://www.physiotherapyequipment.in/short-wave-diathermy.html

It is a physiotherapy equipment used in India and even a fused out tubelight will be lit brightly if we show it six inches above the condenser pads..The pads radiate out waves in radio frequency and that heats the gases of the tube light and even if it is fused out would glow brightly.

1. Contrary to a Tesla coil, Figuera used iron core and the results are not peak output but sustained output. I say this for we have used the primary, in another experiment, not as electromagnets but to power the lamps. 10x200 watts lamps and the secondary was able to light up to 5x200 watts lamps. This was done for tests and for safety considerations. However the combined output in this case is less than the input.

2. It is only when we make the primary work like electromagnets we get more output than input and I believe that is sustained one. I will do the tests and then I will inform you. If the results are negative also I would inform you.

In the system on the para marked 1,  I think that there is a variable frequency driver controller circuit used in wind turbines and Alternators and if it is used in the system as described the voltage in the primary would not drop and the usable output would be more than the input. But I need to check and test them.

I find that Figuera's statement and Buforn's statement that electricity comes from interactions of atmosphere and earth to be correct on experimental basis. So I believe them. Of course they are more than 100 years old. I believe that the Tesla coil secondary also is earthed at one end and the increased output is due to using high frequency and connecting between the atmosphere and earth. But I have not built or experimented with a tesla coil. So I really cannot comment.

I will take a minimum of two weeks to come back. I'm not loaded with cash and I have to put in my own money to do these tests and report. But I will come back and you can see for yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 04:13:41 PM
I will need to agree with you on Transformers if you consider Tesla coil to be a transformer. By Transformers I meant commonly used transformers and did not consider Tesla coil which outputs high voltage and cannot be used to generate usable power. To my limited knowledge.

We have used an Electrician, voltmeter, ammeter, and a multimeter and no voltage showed up in the primary. The current used was AC as you rightly describe. The iron rods have high impedance again. But the magnetism was enormous but there was no power to the lamps. Not even a single volt..That was the amazing thing..How an electromagnet can block about 2000 watts of power from getting through the wires wound around it is not understandable by me.

The results are perfect. And I do not cheat and I do not have the kind of your knowledge and so I do not intend to teach or pretend to teach.

Your language is very strong and so Hanon feels agitated. I take it in a friendly way and am not disturbed for I only report the factual findings here so others can also benefit. Nothing more. I do not know any one here and I do not know people personally and do not take things personally.

I apologize for any miscommunication and let us carry on. But give me a break for two weeks. And try to replicate the results and check for yourselves.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 15, 2014, 05:04:55 PM
Power is defined as "rate of work done"

Think that you have 100 Joules of stored energy.  You can dissipate it as 10 Joules in 10 seconds (power is 10 Watts), 100 Joules in            1 second (power is 100 Watts), 1000 Joules in 0.1 seconds (power is 1000 Watts), 10,000 Joules in 0.01 seconds (power is 10,000 Watts) and so on ...

In all the above instances if you multiply watts with time,  you will get energy as 100 Joules which is conserved.

A simple example  -  If you connect 3 Watts bulbs 100 nos. in parallel to a battery,  the battery dries out quickly delivering 300 Watts.  But if you connect just one 3 Watts bulb, the battery retains its charge for a very long time delivering just 3 watts.

I think this is just high school physics and no electrical engineering is involved in this.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 06:04:52 PM

...  We got 630 volts and 20 amps in the Ammeter at no load. Since this was way too high for us we stopped. We need to build a transformer to step down the voltage to around 200 volts and then give it to the load lamps to check. Secondly I have had
50 Amps Ammeters burning out after showing 50 amps at no load. I would not believe that there was amps at no load if the Ammeters had not burned out..
...


Hi NRamaswami,

Would like to ask on your 20 Amper output current measurement you performed on the secondary with 'no load'.  I guess that you connected the Ampermeter directly across the secondary coil,  actually measuring the "short circuited output current" of the secondary coil, was this so?  If yes, then you actually had a load: it was the inner resistance (impedance) of your Ampermeter, ok?

But then your earlier measured 630V voltage (which I assume was measured across the open secondary coil) was divided between the secondary coil's inner impedance and the inner resistance (impedance) of the Ampermeter: these two impedances were in series from the 630V induced emf point of view and you can surely understand that due to the voltage divison across the series impedances,  the bigger part of the 630V induced emf remained inside the secondary coil (and got lost as heat as in any generator) and only a smaller part of it remained for the Ampermeter which was willy-nilly the 'load'.  This is because an Ampermeter has a much less inner resistance (impedance) in the 20-50 Amper range than your described secondary coil impedance has.

So what I mean here is that your output power cannot be calculated by multiplying the 630V with the 20A if your ampermeter was indeed used to short circuit the secondary coil. 

Perhaps a possible solution to step down the 630V output voltage is to use 3 identical off-the-shelf 220V step down mains transformers and connect their primary coils in series, and also connect their secondaries either in series or parallel as need arises.

OF course the simplest solution would be to use less number of turns for the Figuera secondary coil so that it can output less than 630V.

ONE more thing I would like to ask: did you monitor the input current when you were measuring the 20 Amper 'no load' current in the secondary coil?  I.e. did you use an Ampermeter also in the primary coil between one of the input mains wire and one of the primary coil input wire? I am curious how the input current changed (if it changed, that is) when nothing was attached to your secondary coil and then you attached the Ampermeter to the secondary?
Putting this otherwise: how the Figuera transformer behaves for a short across its secondary?  (here I assume the Ampermeter shorted the secondary coil)

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 06:33:34 PM
The secondary was not shorted. It was kept open. Not connected to the load. We kept it open to check what is the voltage. We expected high voltage but did not expect the Ammeter to show the Amps and did not expect to see such high voltage. So we immediately switched off.

Both Primary and secondary had voltmeter and Ammeter connected separately to them. This why we are able to say what is the input voltage and amperage and what is the output voltage and amperage. Input voltage is 220 volts and 7 amps. Output is 630 volts and 20 amps. We need to put a step down transformer to see that the output is not peak output as it happens when we switch on or switch off but sustained output.

We have tried to reduce the input voltage and lower the input voltage, lower is the efficiency of the device.  If we reduced the turns of the secondary as you say we could check what is the amperage in the secondary but my feeling is that lower the voltage in the secondary, lower would be the amperage. Doubling the voltage would quadruple the amperage is something that we read about secondary output. So if we reduce the turns to reduce the secondary voltage, we may not increase the amperage in the secondary. The system has to increase both voltage and amperage but then must be stepped down using a powerful step down transformer that can take up to 100 to 200 amps. That would be costly and would need to be custom built. 

My guess is that Figuera drawings are showing 7 different modules the result of first one feeding to the second and the second one feeding to the third and so on.

Probably then the rotary device was intended only for the first module with the rest of the other modules not being shown by him.

I had given 12 volts and 16 amps to the module also and found very little increase in the output. Unless we increase the input voltage, the secondary does not perform.

Power given in Watts matter but of that power Voltage must be at least 20 times higher than the Amperage for the device to show efficiency in the secondary. Since magnetic field strength depends on number of turns multiplied by amperage, there needs to be a reasonable amperage for the device to work. If the 20:1 minimum ratio for the input voltage and amperage is not there, we do not have any results.

If we give high amperage low voltage, magnetism is high but the resulting induced electricity is not high. If we give the same wattage with high voltage and lower amperage combination the resulting secondary performs well. I do not know why again....But this is the result we got..Probably the induced emf is higher when the input voltage is higher. I have read that we can increase the frequency of the current for a low amperage to get a high induced emf  and secondary output and probably the rotary device of Figuera by producing sparks achieved that as well. I do not know. Sparks have high frequency I guess.

The frequency used was the mains frequency of 50 Hz only..We did not give high frequency. Plain simple normal mains AC was directly used to generate the electromagnet.

We will build the device again and add a step down transformer and then would inform you all. But it will take 2 to 3 weeks depending on my workload. Thanks and will post my replies only next week. Until then please bear with me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 06:59:57 PM

....
Both Primary and secondary had voltmeter and Ammeter connected separately to them. This why we are able to say what is the input voltage and amperage and what is the output voltage and amperage. Input voltage is 220 volts and 7 amps. Output is 630 volts and 20 amps. We need to put a step down transformer to see that the output is not peak output as it happens when we switch on or switch off but sustained output.

....


So if I understand you correctly, you used only one voltmeter and one ampermeter all the time, and did not use 2 voltmeters and two Ampermeters simultenously, right?   Two meters (a volt and an Amper) for the primary input and two meters for the secondary, used all four meters at the same time, this was not so?

Thanks for your answer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:04:08 PM
Sorry for any miscommunication on my part..

We had two volt meter and two Ammeters..

One voltmeter and one Ammeter for primary

Another voltmeter and another ammeter for secondary.

Hope this clarifies your doubts..Bye for this week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 07:12:05 PM
Okay, thanks for the answer.

Please check with a digital Ohm meter the inner resistance of your Ampermeter set to the 20-30 Amper measurement range, I think you would measure under or around 1 Ohm values or so, and this value is with which you shorted the secondary when you saw the 20 Amper.  And I believe the 1 Ohm or less resistance is already a very nearly short circuit for a 600V secondary coil.

Thanks, Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:21:25 PM
Hi:

1. That Ammeter is an analog ammeter and we cannot set it to 20 to 30 amps range.

2. That has already burnt out and we will use a different one.

3. We did not short the secondary. It was kept open. Your assumption is wrong here. That is why we say under no load conditions.

4. We will check the ohms of the Ammeter next time. You may well be right but as I said we have to use a step down transformer and see the voltage and amperage output and see the useful output. That part is pending as I have told you from the beginning. That said as the voltage goes up, the useful amps also go up in the secondary. This is a fact we have recorded when we have tested other lower voltage versions.

This is why I say we need a significant primary input voltage and amperage combination. Minimum 20:1 ratio needed for secondary to work reasonably and higher we go better it becomes. However the amperage should also be reasonably well in the 5 to 10 amps range for any voltage for reasonable magnetism to be present to show effect on secondary. Figueras rotary device achieved high frequency it seems in addition to all this.in his modular approach. But I need to test and then only I can report..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:36:23 PM

You are quite correct in stating that resistance of the wire and the ammeter must be measured together to arrive at the amps. Volts= amps x resistance.. But this is AC and would the above equation apply..

We certainly did not measure the results this way. we have had up to 250 volts and had 2 amps useful power as we used to light 200 watts lamps. This is when the primary was not made an electromagnet but was used to power lamps. The incidental emf was what was used in the secondary to get 500 watts of useful power.  Higher the voltage, higher the amperage avaiilable in the secondary.

However when the primary is used as electromagnet, more power output comes as the voltage is higher. So when we had 630 volts we were under the impression that we had 20 amps. You can well be right that we cannot calculate it that way. The only solution is to rebuild the device and test and check the results with a step down transformer that can handle the high amperage current.

We will do it and report this to you all so all can benefit. Thanks for the understanding and support.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 07:36:44 PM
....
3. We did not short the secondary. It was kept open. Your assumption is wrong here. That is why we say under no load conditions.
....


Please understand that the Ampermeter can only measure current when it is inserted into a circuit:  the meter makes a closed circuit in the secondary coil, otherwise there is no any current could flow when the secondary were an open circuit.  This is why I mentioned the inner resistance of an Ampermeter, it is small enough to be nearly equal to a short circuit effect.

Anyway, I am looking forward to your new tests.

Take care,
Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:45:19 PM
Hi:

Double the voltage and amperage would be quadrupled is the dictum on secondaries I think.

For 250 volts we had 2 amps of useful power. No doubt on that.

Make the voltage 500 volts and the amps become 16 amps.

Make the voltage 630 volts and the amps become 20.16 amps..So I think we kind of recorded properly. But let me check by testing.

My intention was to tell others what I have done and what we saw and what we can to help the community to move forward in this device. If that is done to a little extent today, my purpose is served. Please note that I spend my own money, I'm not a rich person and I have my troubles and so I may take 2 or 3 weeks to come back to report the results. I cannot keep posting like this. Today I had to post 21 posts here and I cannot do like this.. I'm sorry for not answering any questions until next week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 07:56:28 PM
Hi:

Double the voltage and amperage would be quadrupled is the dictum on secondaries I think.

For 250 volts we had 2 amps of useful power. No doubt on that.

Make the voltage 500 volts and the amps become 16 amps.

Make the voltage 630 volts and the amps become 20.16 amps..So I think we kind of recorded properly. But let me check by testing.
...

I keep my finger crossed that what you say above would be correct for the Figuera transformer.  Because for normal transformers it is not true, unfortunately.

I am trying to help also and weed out misconceptions or bad measurement results.  I hope you will be successful in replication and take your time, no need to sit here and always answer.  Just take it easy.

Greetings,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 08:11:10 PM
Hi Gyula:

Many thanks for the kind words. What I'm not able to understand is the one simple thing all of your highly skilled people have forgotten.

A normal transformer works on the principle of magnetic induction between identical or same charges. Lenz law applies here. This normal transformer changes voltage in to lower or higher voltage. Power being constant the ampere value changes. This is subject to the forces of magnetic repulsion.

In Figuera design you have a difference. The middle section is where the forces of magnetic attraction alone are present. The charge here is the opposite charge. As the electricity of lower voltage and higher amps in the secondary in the primary No 1 reaches one of the poles it moves without resistance and using magnetic attraction to the opposite pole of primary No.2. Here you have both voltage and amperage to build up. This built up amperage voltage is what separates Figuera design from other transformers. There are seven such modules in his design to increase the power. This is because he gave a lower voltage input and it needed to increase to the 550 volts output reported.

At 550 volts Figuera was reported to get about 16000 watts of power. So it was around the 28 amps range. That essentially means that he used the modular approach to keep building the power from one module to the next module.

I'm not able to understand why all of you people ignore the power of magnetic attraction between opposite poles present in this design and in the design of Alfread Hubbard.

Thanks again for your kind words of encouragement. This is not a normal transformer. The amplifying center core is not present in other transformers and the double primaries whose opposite poles face each other is also not present in normal transformers. Let me do the tests and report to you all. Thank you so much for your very kind words..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 08:26:23 PM
...
I'm not able to understand why all of you people ignore the power of magnetic attraction between opposite poles present in this design and in the design of Alfread Hubbard.
...

Dear NRamaswami,

I may cause you disappointment but I myself have not dig deeply into the Hubbard or the Figuera setups because of lack of correct details, and I do not  have much money either to build and test most such setups, sorry.

I 'dared' to share my views on your measurements because it does not depend on whether I have built the Figuera setup or not: this setup (or the Hubbard one) is a black box: it has an input and an output and you have to perform and apply correct measurement methods for both.  I have experience from my earlier job so I 'dare' to comment I see fit.

Regards,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
No disappointments really and I appreciate your kind words very much. I can see that you want the measurement to be perfect and that is perectly desirable and understandable.

Thanks to the efforts of Hanon we have the old spanish patents and I have translated them. Even before that we have ignored whatever is stated in textbooks and went by our experimental results. For example the High voltage is needed to induce a high induced emf is never stated in any book. We needed to test that and understand that. Prior to that we used to give 12 volts and 16 amps current from a step down transformer without any success in generating power in the secondary. It was all a slow learning curve. If we look at the magnetic field stength of a magnet it only talks about ampere turns. Strangely a weak magnet produces better output in secondary and a strong magnet does not do that. We found this minimum 20:1 voltage:amperage combination by experiments.

I apologize for any miscommunication on my part. I thank you very much for your very kind words and cautious approach in using the right technique and measuring instruments for measurements.

Regarding Hubbard, it still remains mysterious to me. He is reported to have used mimimum number of layers which may not be true. But the output is very high amperage and lower voltage when it was given to load and so a higher voltage must be present at no load conditions. But that is still not resolved by me. I can understand the Figuera concept clearly and am reasonably confident that I can come up with working results.

I remain grateful and I remain obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 15, 2014, 09:25:02 PM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/)


Reading all your comments makes me feel like Alice in Wonderland, so extraordinary it is.Imho Figuera invented somethind which perpetuate in history for a long time. Hubbard device should be the same , maybe without iron core powered by Tesla coil ?
I feel that the mystery maybe about the way magnetic induction is used , did you allow magnetic field collapse to zero or maintain it constantly above zero strength when changing ?


Good luck and please keep going !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 10:25:48 PM
Hi Forest..

Thanks for the kind words..

regarding the fact whether the magnetic field was collapsing or not, How do I know? I do not know..All I know is this..

If the magnetic field strength of both the coils is the same we get the best results..If one primary is weaker than the other the results are not useful at all. Both of them must be of equal strength.

I determined the magnetic field strength by the number of turns of the primary and kept both of them constant. Since the input is AC and is coming from the same source, there was no need for the rotary device and since the current moved from NS of P1 to NS of P2 there was no need for any resistor array.. I ignored them all. No capacitors were used either. They were simply a waste of input..Only without capacitors and with just wires we got the best results. No complicated circuit nothing. No electronics.. Simply it s massive number of iron rods running to perhaps about 150 kg and a lot of wires and nothing more than that.  All wires wound in the same direction.. That is all is needed to replicate the experiment. You need a lot of turns and a lot of wire. One thing that might have made all this possible is the quadfilar coil as current circulates four times in the first primary before it goes to the second primary. And the middle secondary is of equal length but has a lot more turns than the primary as it is a single wire and has many layers of wires.

Any one can easily replicate the experiment. And see the results. But be extremely careful the voltage and amperage output is high.

Iron used was soft iron rods. Nothing else..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 10:40:39 PM
By any chance, did you or your mates take any photograps of that setup you had?  OR you still have some 'remains' and could take a photo?

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 10:57:46 PM
Oh Yes.. I have all the wires remaining and can take pictures and post right away.. I have removed the quadfilar wire and wound them in to different things and last week we were trying to understand the Hubbard core.. We have succeeded in creating magnetism in all the 8 coils..Just wait..Just took them as they are in my mini lab room in the office and am posting them for you.

The quadfilar coil has been removed to do other experiments. I bought 8 to 12 coils of 4 sq mm wires and we manually fixed them to become as quadfilar coil to cut costs. The one you see on the Hubbard attempt is the only three core cable we have. We have a total of about 1300 meters of wire but that is needed to make one module of Figuera and we would need another 1300 meters to make the second module.

The problem can be solved easily if I make the second module a step down transformer of sorts and then provide the feedback from the second module secondary to the first module primary. But I need to invest time, money, manpower etc and note that all is my personal time and money.

You now have the photos. We can take videos and show the actual results also but it would require another few man days of work and I need to hire people and pay them all. That is a problem and getting the right people to do the work is also a problem..But I will do it any way..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 11:11:19 PM
Thank you.   And just take your time, do the replication step by step as convenient.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 11:29:31 PM
Hi Gyula:

I hope you are satisfied now that I instantly took the photos of the lab as it exists and posted it for you to recognize that I infact conducted the experiments as claimed. My intention is to put the information in to the public domain so every one can replicate. I have an idea how the self sustaining part of Hubbard worked but in my experiments I have promised on mother Earth that some thing will happen bound to happen and had been disappointed that it did not happen. So I can only do experiments and only after confirmation I can confirm that things happen in the way I have posted. Any one having any doubt that we did or did not do the experiments would now know that we have indeed done the experiments. I'm now aged 51. Let me do my contribution to humanity..That is all I have in my mind..There are to my knowledge at least 4 to 5 different devices that can be used to generate energy as self sustaining energy generators.. I will need to work on others and post them..

I actually got in to this for in India especially in Tamil Nadu where I live due to power shortage lot of families lost employment, lot of businesses closed and I have 1200 clients and am a busy person and even I had to struggle to run the office. I have seven full time employees now and two part time employees and have given appointment to another one. At one point I had 19 employees and those who left me could not get employment for some time. I know the difficulties. I came to Madras the city I live in with just $20 and had struggled in life enormously to reach this level and so when I see people losing employment for lack of power, I understand their problem. It is only then last year i decided to look in to what is power generation and how it can be improved and I have filed a few patent applications as well.

So there is no deception here. Whatever I reported is a fact and if I do not know something I would say so and would be happy to learn and happy to be corrected and guided as well. I remain obliged. I hope you are now satisfied.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 11:38:03 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

I did not ask for photos because I did not believe you , I simply hoped to understand the modified Figuera setup much better from seeing an actual implementation, than by reading the texts.  You surely know the saying: a photo worths a thousand words. That is all.   

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 11:48:54 PM
The modified implementation of figuera has been taken down by us now. But we can reconstruct it and show the results without any problem.

We removed all that for the Electrician who worked with me on that project passed away three months back. Then others did not want to work on that project. So I asked them to remove them all and kind of cleaned out the room. Then we tried to do Hubbard. Failed in getting magnetism in four of the 8 coils. Now we have succeeded but the second four have lower magnetism than the first four coils. I think I have understood how to fix it but only experiment will tell.

I will rebuild the cores again and show the results. So you can even direct me to take the measurements and check online webcast through skype what we are doing and guide us as well. That is also no problem. We are quite open. And I only report facts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 16, 2014, 12:24:30 AM
Hallo NRamaswami,
It´s very nice from you to post your results and you’re your experiments, Thank you!

As I could read, did you used the same arrangement as I posted some pages before?
2 identical Electromagnets (red & blue) and the third in between as sandwich?

I have the same opinion about giving the thing to the people everywhere in the globe.

Best regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 12:36:31 AM
Ok. Next time I build the device I will make the secondary coils to go to earth as a safty measure. We will measure the voltage and amperage then. Is that ok. Whether you all agree or not this is what I'm going to do as I need to check the voltage and then wind a transformer to reduce the voltage and increase the amperage. That is both safe as well as increase our confidence that higher the voltage, higher would be the amperage. We will then build a customized step down transformer to step down the voltage and then give the output to the load. We can all then see if the output power is higher than the input power or not..We will try to do this within about ten days..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 12:50:54 AM
Hi NMS:

The photo shown by you is different.

Mine was a rocket like set up or pencil like set up..

Three electromagnets all connected in series. Like a Pencil or Rocket..

NS - NS - NS

Bolded NS are Primary 1 and Primary 2. In these things a step down secondary is wound first upon which the quadfilar coil was wound as primary.

The secondary NS is a step up version of a single wire having several layers. I did not count the turns and layers. But we ensures that the P1 and P2 had equal number of primary wires to get the same magnetic field strength. Ene of P1 connected to beginning of P2.

All three secondaries are in series..

There is nothing more to my set up. Simple one but a large one to construct. we believe that about 6 feet of iron rods and a lot of them are needed to get sufficient force and magnetic flux to induce the secondary. There are no moving parts. Large the core, the larger would be the output is true.

Will get back to you later. Bye for now..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 16, 2014, 01:20:07 AM
One problem can be if the voltage and current output are 90 degrees out of phase then you'll get next to no output power as the power factor will be close to zero. but the open circuit voltage and short circuit current might not indicate that, it would help to see voltage and current traces for the output while on load of say 60 Watts compared to say 25 Watts, then we could see what would happen with even more load as a picture of circuit behavior is made.

If the "magic" is happening in the arrangement of the transformer parts then all we need replicate is the actual transformer arrangement and excite it to get the same current/voltage phasing that the resistor array/commutator does. Remember Figuera says that no real diligence is required so there should not need to be any micron tolerances for gaps ect.

Many people in the past have excited transformers or (coils) from both ends with opposite polarities and different phasing. I fail to understand how people can think no one has tried to do just exactly that before.

Figuera died not long after his claims changed from a 1902 regular inverter type arrangement to a 1908 device that is self powering and outputting copious power as well as running itself with no real changes to the device.
This in itself is odd. Is it possible that the sudden onset of an illness could have affected his judgement ? Back in the day he lived little was known of many illnesses which can affect cognitive function. Maybe Bufon was a hypnotist, anything is possible.

The main thing is the device is tested properly and investigated.

Woopy made a video showing a small setup where the output did not affect the input, but that means nothing unless the output is more than the input. What it probably means is the voltage and current output are likely about 90 degrees out of phase.

So we need a north and south inducer coils on cores and an induced coil between, when the north coil is energized as compared to the south coil needs to be graphed. Is it 180 out of phase as in a normal inverter or is it 90 degrees out of phase ?

Bufon's claim that to get industrial scale currents the induced coils need to be wound under the inducer coils on the same core means something. That is if he did make the claim, I don't read Spanish.  :-[

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:32:16 AM
Farmhand:

I also don't read spanish. I typed the patent of Buforn in to google translate and got the translation.

I do not know what is the phase of the secondary with respect to the primary. What I did is simple.

Wound a single wire secondary core on P1. 3 layers If I remember correctly about 85 to 88 turns per layer.
Wound the primary upon the secondary. Quadfilar primary.
Primary is wound for a number of layers and turns. Probably about four or five.
Primary and secondary are wound in same direction. This is P1.

Identical P2 is also wound.

The secondary is the middle coil which is single wired and is made up of many layers and a number of turns.

Connection is like this NSP1- NSs-NSP2

Now I do not know if there is any 90' phase difference or 180' phase difference is there. What is the phase difference between the secondary and primary of a normal transformer must have been there as all the secondaries are connected in series.

Regarding phase difference between the P1 and P2 I do not know. Current circulated four times in P1 before it went to P2 where it circulated four times. So a time varying magnetic field is present in both P1 and P2. This induces the secondary which works.

There is nothing more than this for me to disclose at the moment. Sufficient information is given for any one to replicate the device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:48:43 AM
Farmhand:

Please check Buforn's patent. He demonstrated it before the spanish patent office. The spanish patent examiner agreed that the machine worked as claimed. That translation is provided by Hanon himself I think.

In my experiments what I have understood is this. Electricity and Magnetism can exist together or exist apart. We have had magnetism cancelled in devices we built but we have had eddy currents in the electromagnets. The rods did not magnetize. It depends on the way we wind the wires.

Similarly as I reported earlier if the magnet is very strong it blocks the electricity from moving forward. It is quite possible that iron rods have high impedance so electricity is not going to the load. Alternatively what I believed was that the powerful magnet acts in the reverse way of a rotating permanent or electromagnet that produces electricity and the static powerful electromagnet simply absorbed the electricity and sent it to atmosphere like a blackhole.

So we really do not have full information on this subject. You would no where find the info that high voltage: amperage ratio is a must for secondary to work. But thinking about it, I'm not aware of any transformer in mass use that uses low voltage and high amperage as input and works. My knowledge as I repeatedly acknowledge is limited but even if they do work, their efficiency would be way too low.

Calling Buforn a hyponotist or Figuera might have gone insane at old age are not fair when the Patent office has examined the device and certified that it worked as claimed. Simply because we do not have such devices today does not mean that the technology did not exist. There are several technologies of ancient era that are superior to todays technology but have disappeared. We do not have any information on them. Hanon must be complimented for his hard work to bring this patent and the device to our attention. My only limited part is I modified the device, understood the patent, eliminated the unnecessary parts and made the device a simple one. Because the input is given as AC or can be given as pulsed DC..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 16, 2014, 06:31:17 AM
I didn't call Bufon a hypnotist, I suggested the possibility. And the possibility of people suffering a rapid onset disease that affects cognitive function is real.

Here is all I see about the "demonstration" to the patent examiner. It certainly doesn't seem so simple as him saying that he observed the device "in operation" and producing more output than input energy.

Quote
GERONIMO BOLIBAR
Engineer-Industrial Property Agent
Barcelona
 
Honorable Sir,
In compliance with Article 100 of the Law of Property May 16, 1902 I have the honor to
transmit to you a certificate signed by engineer D. Jose Ma Bolibar y Pinós crediting to
have conducted measures of practical implementation of the patent No. 47706 issued
on June 6, 1910 in favor of Constantine Buforn by an “Electrical Generator "Universal".
God preserve you many years.
Barcelona June 5, 1913. Signed: Gerónimo Bolibar
To: Illustrious Lord Chief Registrar of Industrial Property


....................................................................


D. Jose Ma Bolibar y Pinós, Industrial Engineer, at the request of D. Constantine
Buforn, patentee of invention No. 47706.
 
Certify: That I have examined the material consisting of original memory corresponding
to said background patent, issued on June 6, 1910, for "A GENERATOR OF
ELECTRICITY" UNIVERSAL "which consists essentially of a series of inducer
electromagnets combined with a series of electromagnets or induced coils, a switch
and comprising a brush or rotary switch, which makes contact successively on the
series of fixed contacts and get a continuous variation of the current flowing through
the coils of the inducer electromagnets, developing in this manner a current in induced
coils
.
 
I further certify that provided the necessary reports when they had to come to the
knowledge of the conditions under which it is carried out the exploitation of this patent
,
that D. Constantine Buforn exploitation of this patent in the street Universidad No. 110
ground floor, of this city, having of all the elements necessary for the construction, in
the proportion rational for its use, of electricity generators which are described and
characterized in the memory of that patent
.
 
For all these reasons, I consider the above patent implementation in accordance with
Article 98 provided in the current Industrial Property Law.

And for the record I issue this in the city of Barcelona on June 5, 1913.
Signed: J.M. Bolibar


..............................................................

On June 6, 1913 Mr. G. Bolibar submitted certification dated June 5, 1913 and signed
by Mr. J.M. Bolibar, Industrial Engineer, to justify the implementation of the invention
patent number 47406.
 
NOTE
 
In view of what is stated in the certification referred to in the above extract, presented
for the purposes of Article 100 of the Law, and as the application was filed within the
period set by Article 99 of the Law thereof, the undersigned believes appropriate to
declare as implemented the object of that patent, according to article 34 of the
Regulation.
V.S. resolved
Madrid, July 9, 1913
Signed
 
 
Implemented
Number 47706
July 9, 1913
The note
Signed


Unfortunately I am unable to locate the English translations of the patents number 47406 and Patent number 47706. So if anyone could link those I will read them.

There are several possibilities.

1) The Engineer-Industrial Property Agent status of the examiner may not have qualified him to properly analyze the device.

2) He was paid.

3) The device outputs more power than input but not more energy.

4) The device shows more current output than current input but not more energy.

5) The device actually does output more energy than is input to the device by the operator and we will all soon have free energy for ever.

..

Anyway the proof is in the pudding and old patents will not power household appliances. To do that we need a real device.

Now if we look at the control setup with the commutator and resistor array, and plot a phase diagram we ought to be able to determine what the phase relationship between the south and north magnetization of the inducer coils is, then we ought to be able to emulate that and with the same type of inducer induced coil arrangement we should get the promised result.

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 08:53:59 AM
Hi Farmhand:

Thanks for your detailed analysis.. I agree that people can suddenly lose their cognitive functions but that does not happen until the age 78 or so as I could recall. At age 68 for a working person suddenly losing cognitive functions is very difficult to happen. Neurodegenerative diseases do not show up very late. It is only now these subjects are still being researched. I have written patent applications for vaccines for many such diseases.

The modified figuera  device as described and built by me outputs more voltage and amperage than input amperage and voltage. That is all I have determined.  I would neither claim overunity nor claim it as free energy. And I believe that devices can be made to self sustain themselves. Most hydroelectric turbines use a small input power to generate a large output because the rotor is driven by the water force. This small exciting current can be and is taken from the output to run the turbine.

In a similar way a solar powered agricultural water pump can produce electricity by using micro water turbines which are then driving Low RPM alternators to produce a lot of power. That power can be used to charge batteries and provide lighting if we use a large battery bank to store that energy. If power from the alternator is given to this device the output power is going to be greater than the one originally supplied and more batteries can be charged which can then be inverted to useful power.

If you are talking about free energy, I would understand that nothing is free. If you want to stay healthy do a bit of walking, exercise, eat at proper times proper food and have proper sleep. So even to stay normally healthy we need to follow these practices. By that way these experiments have cost me a lot of money and time and it is certainly not free of investment and effort. The learning curve was not free. So nothing comes free without effort. By that view, the solar cells that produce electricity are not free to buy and install but are only converting energy that was being wasted in to useable power.  So essentially Free energy is energy that was hithertobefore wasted and now converted to useable energy. Regarding overunity, if you look at my posts I'm not really not competent to say any thing on the subject.

All I can share and have done is to share the results of my experiments. My experiments strongly indicate that so far the devices that have been built have not used the forces of magnetic attraction but forces of magnetic repulsion. When both these forces are used together to create useful output power, then what we can get as output voltage and amperage is greater than the input voltage and amperage.

Other assumptions are not scientific statements but mere assumptions on your part.  100 years back corruption was negligible not even heard of in most places of the world. The racial practices of the society were different. If you are from US, until very recently blacks were not even given the right to vote I believe. So do not assume things. People did not take bribes that easily in olden days..Society and its values were different. Figuera had a reputation to protect. Buforn as a Patent Attorney has maintained the patent at his own expense for several years. After that we do not know if he sold it out for a fee.  Unless there is something worthwhile, a Lawyer would not spend his own money.

But the strange thing about the Figuera device is this.. It uses both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion again and again and again in the core to build more output power than the initial input. That modular approach combined with using both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion again and again is what strikes me as highly innovative. And it avoids mechanical force totally.

Just name any other generator that does this today..To my limited knowledge there does not appear to be any such generator that uses both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion. 

I believe for these reasons and for the reasons of my results that there is very significant potential in this concept and device. I just assisted the community with the results of my experiments so people can take it forward and keep it in the public domain.

I would appreciate if rather than theorizing any one would try to replicate the experiments very simple ones at that now that I have shared that I did with you all and verify if what I found was true or false..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 16, 2014, 08:54:48 AM

Simply this is an amplifying transformer. Two step down transformers  acting as primary electromagnets set up in such a way that the opposite poles of the two are facing each other and in that place you place another secondary of many turns to step up the voltage. Then what you get is both amperage and voltage increase. In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that.


  "In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that"

NRamaswami,

I tried to figure things up from your view , from  many of your posts,
but your above statement were amazing/wonderfull/magic/..../.....   etc,   :)
I think, "That is not as simple as that".

can you post a "simple  drawing"?, at least with paint application.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 09:43:54 AM
NRamaswami


Can you look at picture and correct it ? Sorry, I used Paint to do that  :-[ We also need to know is that is one one single core (composed of iron rods) or there are 3 cores inside with gaps (as suggested by original patent) , and again the wire sizes, all information about construction repeated, sorry. It's very hard to guess from the word description.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 16, 2014, 11:36:37 AM

OK,
is this your version of Figuera ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 12:41:06 PM
I think Mr. Ramaswami stated long tubes one after the other, may be like this attached.
he will tell us which one is the closer to his setup.
Regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2014, 12:41:16 PM
I had always wondered why Figuera used two primaries. It is clear that he looked for a balance of forces between both them to get and special effect. If not he just had used one primary.

I have an official document that shows that Figuera kept working in a new design after selling the 1902 patent. Maybe he was upset after seeing that they buried his generator. He derived a new design in his 1908 patent

Buforn paid all his patents until 1914.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:14:44 PM
Hi:

1. Air gaps were present in between the cores.

2. The drawing given by ALVARO_CS is very close to what we did. My eyesight is poor and I'm not able to figure out what is the difference between his two figures. Both of them look the same to me.

3. All other earlier drawings are not correct. ALVARO_CS has understood my description correctly.

The drawin that shows an E core and I core in the middle and another E core in the reverse direction is wrong. This is all one straight tube and I said it is rocket like or pencil like to make things more clear. ALVARO_CS is very correct in his drawings but I do not see what is the difference between his two figures.

4. You can connect two step down transformers in series. Amperage will remain reduced but voltage of the two will be combined as the secondaries are in series. This is common knowledge. When we add a middle section where the forces that operate are not the normal forces of magnetic repulsion but forces of magnetic attraction between opposite poles, voltage and amperage increases further..

The problem is that all of you are educated in theory. I'm not..So not knowing things will not work, I have carried out experiments and when we found that the texts do not describe what happens clearly but the experimental results are contradictory, we went by the experimental results..Nothing more..

By the way, how many of you know how to convert iron to permanent magnet and how many of you have actually converted iron to permanent magnet? Real hands on experience..For many electricians I contacted did not know and have not performed that part and did not even that knowledge..

I have reported my experimental findings.. nothing more..I will do the experiments with a step down transformer and let you all know what is the usable output obtained. That I think should solve the issue..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:24:09 PM
Hi Forest:

All wires are 4 sq mm wires that can carry up to 24 amps.

Both secondary and primary are only 4 sq mm wires.

We bought coils after coils of wires of 4 sq mm only. Then put them all together and wrapped up them to make a quadfilar coil. I do not remember the exact number of layers of primary but it was four layers and both primary sides had the same number of layers and same number of turns. Then the magnetic field strength is approximately equal.

However the resistor effect may be there due to the current circulating four times in the primary P1 first before it went to P2 where it circulated another four times before it returned to mains.

Will it have any effect? I really do not have any theoretical knowledge on this part. Nor do I have equipment to measure these things nor I have knowledge or experience in handling such equipment or even what those equipment are..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 01:24:56 PM
hanon


In my opinion,in
1918 Hubbard took exactly the same and slightly improved version of device, and in 1921 he had already finished 8 -transformer device in loop,  self-running and producing 40kW output. Between 1918 and 1939 you can found surprisingly many free energy inventors taking energy from Earth "atmosphere".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 01:25:05 PM
Sorry for the mistake, I tried to edit my post, to attach a bigger image, but could not erase the small one.
Both are identical
(there is air gap between cores)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:31:23 PM
ALVARO_CS

You have not marked the poles in both the figures..

The poles are like this NS - NS - NS   

The South pole of P1 faces the North pole of secondary and the south pole of secondary faces the North pole of P2.. Secondary is located between the two opposite poles of P1 and P2. Whether they are south or north does not matter as I do not know which one is south and which one is North and in any case in AC current poles reverse 50 times a second. But the poles must be opposite poles to enjoy the forces of magnetic attraction..

There is no magic here. We do not have any device that uses the forces of magnetic attraction. Look at an Induction Generator. It is an induction motor that uses the forces of magnetic repulsion but is boosted to rotate faster than the magnetic field to produce electricity due to mechanical energy imparted to it by mechanical means. Figuera clearly describes that this is not needed if we use the forces of magnetic attraction and since the charges between opposite poles are opposite charges, Lenz law is not applicable here.

If you send a rocket up, it needs a lot of energy to go up against gravity. when the energy is expended it stops and then falls back to earth. Its speed is initially zero and as it falls its speed keeps on increasing due to gravitational pull. Right..A body of fixed mass with increasing velocity would increase the energy of the body..So between opposite poles the increase of voltage and amperage is normal. There is no violation of law of physics as far as I can see it. There is no magic here. It is normal common sense and we find this to be experimentally correct.

Please do replicate the experiments and see for yourselves..I have not hidden any thing..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 16, 2014, 01:36:55 PM

@ALVARO_CS


That figure looks remarkable.  Such an arrangement should cause addition of fluxes from all wires  resulting in tremendous output from middle secondary.  Have you tried it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:42:57 PM
Newton II:

Not very tremendous..It increases by 6 times to 8 times. Higher the voltage, higher the amperage.

Hi Forest:

Yes,..You are correct that Hubbard device is similar to Figuera device..I'm working on it and I hope I can replicate it.. Let us wait and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 01:46:12 PM
Hi Forest:

All wires are 4 sq mm wires that can carry up to 24 amps.

Both secondary and primary are only 4 sq mm wires.

We bought coils after coils of wires of 4 sq mm only. Then put them all together and wrapped up them to make a quadfilar coil. I do not remember the exact number of layers of primary but it was four layers and both primary sides had the same number of layers and same number of turns. Then the magnetic field strength is approximately equal.

However the resistor effect may be there due to the current circulating four times in the primary P1 first before it went to P2 where it circulated another four times before it returned to mains.

Will it have any effect? I really do not have any theoretical knowledge on this part. Nor do I have equipment to measure these things nor I have knowledge or experience in handling such equipment or even what those equipment are..


4 mm square ? that's quite thick wire, how big is you transformer then so it only consume 7 amps in primary ? sound like a lot of turns is required for that at 220V. To be completly clear may I ask : did you connected quadfilar once after finishing all layers of primary with 4 wires coming together or did that for each layer separately ? sorry, if it's obvious but I want to see all details.
Maybe would be possible to make small model of device for testing using thinner wires, for example one with 21 insulated strands
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 01:47:06 PM
@ NRamaswami

I drew the cores in red-to-blue color to indicate the two polarity in same element.
As you say, they change depending of time due to AC.
This way of coloring, is a conventional representation that means two polarity.
It is used commonly when representing the two poles of a magnet. Therefore in the setup drawn, opposite poles are facing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 01:52:19 PM
@NewtonII
I tried a similar one WITHOUT the two secondary beneath the primary, and without AC, but pulsed DC via a double commutator.
I`ll keep on going
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:04:49 PM
Hi Forest:

I said it earlier.. We have used 1300 metres of 4 sq mm wire in building the device. Each core 18 inches long. And so we had electromagnets for about 5 feet for the rods were coming out of the tubes on both the sides. So it is about 5 feet long. I think the rods would have weighed about 150 kg of soft iron. You need bulkier iron core to have a lot of turns. Small iron core does not work. Each core when wound with a single wire has 80 to 90 turns..This is because we have used the same wires again and again and cut them and then connected them again using tapes and at these places the wire is thicker and so we do not get the same number of turns.

Larger the diameter and longer the length better is the output.

I do not know the theory and so I can only tell you how much the voltmeter and ammeter showed. I cannot even guarantee that the devices are perfect for the devices are cheap analog devices.

You can also use pulsed DC but the results are better with AC than with pulsed DC.. But for feedback purposes I think pulsed DC would be easier to implement..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:06:26 PM
ALVARO_CS:

thank you for the explanation. I did not know that color scheme.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:15:10 PM
Hi Forest:

I am not able to understand the question on Quadfilar primary..

What we did is as follows..

1. Wind single layer secondary on tube 1 acting as P1. Each turn may have about 85 to 90 turns. Wind three layers of wire. Go down first from top to bottom and then come in the same direction from bottom to top and then go down again from top to bottom always winding in the same direction.

2. Now wind the 4 wires which are in parallel to each other as primary again as above but here the quadfilar coil ends at the top and not at the bottom of the tube.

3. When the winding is completed for four layers or six layers of such quadfilar coil, connect the end of the first wire to the beginning of the second wire and end of second wire to the beginning of the third wire and the end of the third wire to the beginning of the fourth wire.

4. Now wind a similar P2.

5. Now wind the secondary single layer of multiple layers.

6. Place all them. Now connect the end of the P1 fourth wire to the beginning of the P2 wire 1.

7. Connect all three secondaries in series and connect them to load.

8. . Input is given to the beginning of P1 first wire and end of P2 fourth wire.

That completes the set up..Variations to increase the rate of change of magnetic flux are possible but I have not tested them yet..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on February 16, 2014, 03:56:06 PM
NRamaswami
First I would like to thank you for posting all this information. I spent six weeks full time last year trying to duplicate Figuera's device and failed and I am very happy to see some positive results. I believe you have given me enough information  to replicate except for one detail. You mention iron rod for cores. In this country there are many products still called iron but they are in fact steel. Many experimenters here use steel welding rod that has been either painted with lacquer or oxidized with rust for electromagnet cores. Did you use something similar or is iron rod much more common in India? I can buy cast iron rod for dollars a pound or pure iron rod but it is dollars per gram. I hope you can help.
Thanks
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 04:56:40 PM
Hi:

Thanks..We used soft iron rods. You go to junk shops and these rods would be available. If you get steel only it is not a problem really. Steel is supposed to retain some magnetism but when we apply AC, you do not need to worry about it really. For AC would demagnetize any magnetism that is present. We did not have any insulation for soft iron rods and did not bother about hystersis loss or eddy current loss. One of my friends criticised me for not covering the rods with insulation but we simply cut costs. We bought from junk shops to cut costs. 

This device is very very simple to make.

Create a powerful high voltage high amperage secondary in module 1.

Then create a step down secondary in module 2. But step it down to some where near or slighltly higher voltage than the input of module 1.

Now you can simply power the source of the power for module 1 from the output of module 2. Since the output is higher in module 2, the remaining output is used for useful work.

If you can handle high voltages and high amperages,  build more modules than that and make the last module a step down one.  Higher the voltage in the device output, higher would be the amperage. This is the difference here.

But be extremely careful..The voltage that comes out is very high and Ammeters do not show any amps when the voltage is up to 250 volts when they are not connected to load. When it went up to 630 volts the Ammeter showed 20 amps at no load and that indicates a very strong current is also present as the voltage increases.

This will require a lot of man hours and winding will have to be done by hand as all wires are thick insulated wires. It takes a lot of time, effort and money. If it is going to be very costly to replicate in US, we can do it in India since we have already done the project here. We will only need to build the second core now, insulate every thing with plastic and paper and then do this experiment. The step down part requires expensive copper cables which are highly insulated with thick plastic or rubber insulation like those used on the batteries of 5 Kw inverters. They should be able to carry 100 amps of current at least. That is where it gets costly here in India. Another cost is man hours. It costs money to get both unskilled labour and skilled people. Skilled people are needed only for oscilloscope and that kind of stuff but I'm not worried about it as we now know the device performs best under the conditions described. We have used pulsed DC also and the device does not perform well in pulsed DC. I do not know why for I expected that the impedance would be lower in pulsed DC and the results should be better in pulsed DC but to the contrary only when we apply AC we get good results in the secondary. Possibly when we provide a feedback current, the lower efficiency of pulsed DC would be compensated I guess. But guesses are just guesses and experimental results are different from our expectations and calculations.

Since many of the people were going wrong here I posted the experimental results.

Do not bother about steel or any thing else. Ac will demagnetize any magnetism present. Even if it is present, do not worry. Just take action and see the results..Do not go for expensive materials and cut costs..This project has eaten a lot of my money..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2014, 05:19:37 PM
Hi,

What about using 3 light bulbs or 3 heaters in series to reach the 630 volts: 220 V + 220 V + 220 V . Maybe you could use some heaters (resistors) to test the output in a simple way.

Good luck with your tests.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 05:36:06 PM
Hanon:

Three lights would not consume 630 volts. Lights would burn out if the voltage exceeds 270 volts. We need to step them down before we can give it to any load. Same is the case with heaters.

I can not take risks. We would not give any voltage higher than 250 volts to any load. I'm not experienced in high voltage experiments and this is both high voltage and high amperage and is very risky.

So we would better take safety measures than take risks..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 05:50:48 PM
I just want to make one acknowledgement for the results of my experiments.

I was mentored and trained by Mr. Patrick J Kelly PJK who has shut down his website. I emailed him on Feb 8, 2013 when I had no knowledge on these subjects and Patrick asked me to try to replicate Hubbard and then guided me. The guidance was not on point and there were many misconceptions. Then Patrick had a health problem and he retired. He has now given his website to another person in Europe.

I have not mentioned Patricks name for without his consent I did not want to disclose his mentorship but only now I have received an email from him complimenting me and approving my desire to acknowledge this support. He is the person who planted the seed for doing all these experiments in me and without his mentorship and guidance we would not have come to where we are today. All credits go to Figuera, Hanon and Patrick..Without Hanon Figuera would have remained in the shelves..

if you look closely at Figuera's designs and patents he advocates using the foces of magnetic attraction rather than the forces of magnetic repulsion. However in the one we are considering he has combined the effect of both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion together to get a higher output.

To be honest, we also did not believe the results initially but when the ammeter burnt out we knew that current is there.

If you look closely at Don Smith patent on generating energy from capacitors which are suspended on high voltage and high frequency magnetic rod, Don Smith has omitted the fact that the magnetic rod must be placed between the two opposite poles of two primaries.  Once that is done the rest of the results would fall in place.

So only due to the Guidance of Patrick I was able to initiate and start the experiments. When he left we persisted with our efforts and got the results. He has read the forum posts and is very appreciative of me and I feel really very obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 05:57:49 PM
hi Hanon

I do not know how to measure the amperage of a current in an open loop. (no load)
Only know to put the ammeter in series with one of the two output wires when load is present closing the circuit. Also in series (inserted between one wire) before the device, to see input amperage. (eg. before a motor or a lamp)
IMHO, if the whole circuit is open at the end, (no load) no current is circulating.
The primary is closed: two leads live-return
The secondary is open: two leads no load
If the two secondary leads (in-out) were connected to the ammeter, it was shorted (closing the circuit) as has been stated in a previous post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 06:08:58 PM
Alvaro_CS:

Output wires were not connected to each other. They were connected to the load bulbs but because the voltmeter showed very high voltage, we did not switch on the lamps. It is at that point the ammeter showed 20 amps. Normally the Ammeter does not show any amps when no light is burning or even when two 200 watts lights are burning. Ammeter starts showing amperage only when 3x 200 watts lamps are burning and that is only around 1.5 amps. Although the lights are rated at 200 watts they consume less than 200 watts to light up.

When I said the secondaries were kept open I essentially indicated that the secondaries had no load on them and were open circuit. I apologize for any miscommununication on my part and please understand that neither is English my first language nor is this subject my basic expertise area and I readilly acknowledge that I do not know much..Forgive me for any mistakes in communication. Please..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 06:34:06 PM
@NRamaswami

When there is such a good will as yours, no mistake can make an offense, so. . no apology nor forgiveness needed from both sides.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification

English is neither my mother language

regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 16, 2014, 07:03:39 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

You wrote:

Quote
Output wires were not connected to each other. They were connected to the load bulbs but because the voltmeter showed very high voltage, we did not switch on the lamps. It is at that point the ammeter showed 20 amps.

What you describe above is an impossible situation. If the load lamps were switched off, then there is no way the ammeter showed the 20 Amper current. And if it showed, then you somehow had a closed circuit in the secondary you were not aware of, please try to ponder on this. 
I am not saying you do some miscommunication here but you yourself should realize that it is impossible to have an open circuit at the output and still state the 20A current and state an output power with it.
It is okay if you calculated the current by linear interpolation (by mathematically) as you described it last night deducing the numbers from the input current and voltage hence input power but then it is not a measured power but a calculated one.


You also wrote:

Quote

Normally the Ammeter does not show any amps when no light is burning or even when two 200 watts lights are burning. Ammeter starts showing amperage only when 3x 200 watts lamps are burning and that is only around 1.5 amps. Although the lights are rated at 200 watts they consume less than 200 watts to light up.


I put in bold your first sentence above: the first part of your sentence is correct till the word or but the second part is not! When two 200 watts bulbs were burning the ammeter should have already shown a certain current but not zero! Maybe the ammeter was not connected correctly to measure the output current or it was not a dependable instrument? 
Normaly to get the load current at the output, you connect the ammeter in series with the bulbs or in series with the group of the bulbs and the series combination of the meter and the bulb(s) are connected across the output. Was this done so, can you recall?

Well, earlier you mentioned you had an analog meter and it burnt out. Before it burnt out, it must have been abused already because if it was correctly connected in series with the bulbs,  then it should have measured half an amp, one amp etc, any amps higher than zero, ok?

By the way, English is my second language.  I hope you understand it and then you could try to explain this output "mistery".  No problem that you are not an Electrical Engineer but you surely feel that when the bulbs were unconnected, then the 20A current had no way to flow in the secondary coil.

And I am trying to help with these posts and I hope you understand now how the output power is to be measured in the simplest way when you have an AC voltmeter and an AC ampmeter, hooked up at both the input side and the at the output side.  Ammeters always inserted in series with the input side and/or with the output side, this is the only way to get info on the input current draw and on the load current drawn by the bulbs at the output side.
 IF something is not clear in this respect, please ask, and I can draw a simple sketch to show a measuring setup, basically it would reflect what I wrote so far.

Regards,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 07:18:47 PM
I see only one danger , (not real one but in interpretation) - if that 20Amps are at low voltage or in other words if output is mixed 630V low amps and some lower voltage 20 amps. Could it be ? Sorry, English is also not my primary language and I'm not electrical guy also...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 07:36:35 PM
Gyula:

You are correct in all your statements. The Analog Ammeter can be relied on only after 1 Amps. It oscillates a bit before it indicating the current when lamps are burning. But I have no way of knowing what amps it is.

I did not calculate the Amps output. The Ammeter jumped up to 20 amps. It does not do that when the voltage is even at 250 and at no load condition in the secondary.

I have no knowledge on calculation methods for this is not my domain. I perfectly understand your posts and am also eager that the correct report should be given. This is why I have given all the information as we have without hesitation. And I have found that many posters were going wrong. As one of the friends put it, he spent six weeks last year without being able to replicate Figuera. We kind of figuered out a way but we are actually afraid to go forward due to the high voltages and amperages that are shown.

About Voltage: Amperage calculations, I find that if we get 240 volts in the secondary at no load, when we light the lamps we can go up to 1.8 Amps and 100 volts. So it is about 180 watts of output usable output power there.

But when we go to 250 volts at no load the usable output increases to 120 volts and 2 amps. For a 10 volt difference at no load condition the usable output increases by 60 watts. So at 630 volts at no load assuming that there is no amps present, the usable load would go up significantly. It is possible there was a short circuit inside the ammeter. But I have no way of knowing or interpreting these things and my knowledge is not to that level.

Regarding why I'm afraid of this voltage, this comes at 50 Hz frequency. Electricity at low frequency is deadly. This is why we have people getting killed under high voltage lines. In Tesla coil electricity is given at very high frequency. Electricity above 20 Khz is supposed not to kill but I do not know.

In a way I'm also irritated that we are not able to go forward and so shared the information freely.

Regarding the query of Forest, Whether it is low voltage or high voltage current of more than 2 amps can kill people. At 20 amps I'm told by an Electrical Engineer that it can even cause human blood to boil..Can I take risks here? With my kind of knowledge? So we have kept quiet and did not take it forward. Physiotherapists give electrical stimulations at milliamps only for this reason.

But it is a very simple device. Competent people can easily replicate my work and then build the second step down transformer.

Problem is that the iron rods carry the same current as eddy current and at the same frequency.  I'm not satisfied with our knowledge or capacity to handle this kind of voltage and amperage combinations and this is why we have not moved forward. But we will try this week or next week and post to all. I will share the results freely. No problem.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 08:12:09 PM
NRamaswami

The way I see the originality of your setup, is that no one here, as far as I know, has tried with a secondary (induced) under the primary (inductor), but just an induced coil central between the two inductors.
I`ll try this next week but at a lower scale. Much to wind.
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 08:34:18 PM
Actually the original designs are Figuera designs. He clearly describes in one line for using a secondary under the primary to get industrial scale currents. Normally in patent applications the inventors will avoid providing full and particular descriptions and best mode of carrying out the invention and the mode of invention disclosed by Figuera is the weakest one of carrying out his invention. What we did was to understand the purpose of rotary switch and resistor set up and in deleting that and replacing it with Alternating current and making the device an extremely simple one without any electriconics to make it easy to replicate. As I'm a Patent Attorney, I was able to spot this.. Earlier descriptions were completely wrong with same poles facing each other which is totally contrary to the teachings of Figuera..

All electrical turbines today use the force of magnetic repulsion. This results in rotation of the core. Then as the core rotates slowly, to make rotate faster we need mechanical energy which is supplied through mechanical means. This conversion process results in loss. Figuera advocated a different approach altogether to use the combined forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction and use them all and avoid the mechanical means to generate a much larger output than the input.

This is the theory that has been ignored. But it is certainly a valid theory.  Possibly all of you have focused only on the drawings and have not studied the patent description of the original and missed the line. Since the original Figuera device we made did not work, I worked it out and did not want to lose the power that can be taken out of the primary. We have actually wound Coils outside the primary also in some experiments but there was not much of difference. When you have a lot of excess voltage output and amperage waiting to be tapped, why create additional voltage and further complicate the issue was the thought and we avoided it all.

Please take care while doing the experiments as these are very high voltage and high amperage ones. You are not going to see any major excess output until you cross the 450 or 500 volts in the secondary I think but this is a guess.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2014, 10:08:27 PM
Hi all,

Here I attach an interview to Clemente Figuera with some interesting insights. This is direct testimony from Figuera himself. It is a good historical review of his findings. It appeared in a local newspaper in 1902. Enjoy it !!!

INTERVIEW TO CLEMENTE
FIGUERA 1902
Mr. Clemente Figuera. - The name of the
conscientious and intelligent engineer,
Inspector of mountains in Canary, is now
universally known, thanks to the news
published by the press about the generator
of his invention for producing far-reaching
consequences, because it constitutes a
valuable element in modern mechanics,
solving problems which will influence
powerfully in most industries.
The meritable engineer states in a recently
published work. - "With persistent effort
nature keeps its secrets, but man´s
intelligence, the most precious gift due to
the divine artist, author of all creation,
allows that slowly and at the cost of
thousands studies and works, the human
race realize that God's work is more perfect
and harmonious than it looks at first sight.
There was no need to create a agent for
each kind of phenomenon, nor varying
forces to produce the multiple motions, nor
so many substances as varieties of bodies
are present to our senses; In doing so, it
was proceeding worthy of a least wise and
powerful creator that that, with a single
matter and a single impulse given to an
atom, started in vibration all cosmic matter,
according to a law from which the others
are natural and logical consequences”
And later he adds: "The twentieth century
has given us the mercy of discovering its
program in general lines. It will stop using
the hackneyed system of transformations,
and it will take the agents where the nature
has them stored. To produce heat, light or
electricity, it will rely on the suitable
vibratory motion because nature´s
available storages are renewed constantly
and have no end ever. For the next
generation, the steam engines will be an
antique, and the blackness of coal, will be
replaced by the pulchritude of electricity, in
factories and workshops, in ocean liners, in
railways and in our homes”
So says Mr. Figueras, who is consistent
with his scientific creed, has based his
significant invention on harnessing the
vibrations of the ether, building a device,
that he names as Generator Figueras, with
the power required to run a motor, as well
as powering itself, developing a force of
twenty horse power. Should be noted that
the produced energy can be applied to all
kinds of industries and its cost is zero,
because nothing is spent to obtain it. All
parts have been built separately in various
workshops under the management of the
inventor, who has shown the generator
running in his home in the city of Las
Palmas.
The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus.
With the generator it may be obtained the
voltage and amperage required, as direct
or alternate currents, producing light,
driving force, heat and all the effects of the
electricity. It is said that shortly Mr. Figuera
will depart to Paris, to constitute a union in
charge of the exploitation of his invention.
Due to the gallantry of our good friend, the
distinguished photographer of Las Palmas
Mr. Luis Ojeda, we thank for making public
to our readers a portrait of Mr. Clemente
Figueras, to whom we congratulate on his
invention, making fervent hopes to produce
the expected beneficial results, for the
benefit of mankind, for the sake of science
and honor of our country, proud to count
him among the number of its illustrious
sons.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 16, 2014, 11:53:09 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

I would like to show you an ebay link where an analog AC ampermeter is offered, maybe you like it:

http://www.ebay.in/itm/Class-2-5-Accuracy-AC-30A-Analogue-Ampere-Panel-Meter-/251452933597?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_203&hash=item3a8bc345dd   

And I found this transformer manufacturer based in Tamil Nadu, maybe not so far from you, and maybe, just maybe they have a junkyard where burnt out tranformers are stored, probably waiting for recycling or rebuilding, and I thought you would approach them for a favor... 
this is their site: http://www.transformersindia.com/ 

Greetings,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 12:06:14 AM
Gyula:

Thanks for the info.

The days when we needed transformers to be built for us are gone. We now have the knowledge to build transformers of fixed output type ourselves. But we still do not know how to build a variac.

The transformer of the step down type that I would would be very costly to purchase. Rather I would buy insulated copper or aluminium wires that can carry 100 to 150 amps and then wind down as the secondary in the second coil or wind it up as a second module secondary which is of a step down type... But that is not the problem.

Problem is lot of voltage in the first module. Iron rods also carry electricity when magnetised. So we need to make the device one without any holes. and then cover the ends with plastic caps. Then we need to cover the wires again with plastic sheets. It is only then that I can test it again to check whether the system would work without the air gaps. I think it would.

Once that is cleared, then I need to measure the voltage and then decide on the number of turns and hand wide a large wire as the step down thing and check that the output voltage is acceptable and can be given to load. Then we will give it to the load.

I would build one module as step up and another module as step down ones so both of them get the benefit of magnetic attraction and do not work as normal transformers.

A normal transformer if I want to order can be ordered over the phone but we would end up paying a lot of money. This way we know what we have done and what exactly is needed and can unwind or make additional windings..

Thanks for your support and kind thoughts..

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 12:09:58 AM
Hi Gyula:

You see the picture of the Ammeter at the bottom. Up to 5 amps I would not know what is the amperage. I have better ones than this but they are little more costly. I can order what is needed over the phone. I know a lot of people. I'm a Patent  and Trademark Attorney and I have 1200 clients with 26 years of experience. So I can order over phone and it will come to me. Thanks for the support.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 04:35:58 AM

@NRS


When bulbs are switched OFF, ammeter cannot show any reading if it is connected in series with bulbs.

With your description we have to conclude that you have connected the ammeter directly to the output terminals. By doing so you have shorted the output terminals through ammeter.  An ammeter should always be connected in series with load.  When you connect the ammeter to the terminals without load, it becomes parallel to the terminals and output will be shorted through ammeter. 

So, the current 20 Amps which your ammeter is showing is short circuit current which may not be the current produced by your device.  Because when you make a short ciruit,  the entire current flowing in street pole lines ( connection from electricity board) may come to your device depending on the type and configuration of device if you are drawing input power from city power supply.

When I was studying in schools,  I used to conduct such 'short ciruit experiments' unknowingly, drawing huge current from street power supply lines to my house causing blowing of fuse, damaging house wiring, burning of sockets etc.  which is a very dangerous thing to do.  (somewhere you have mentioned that you have blown off one ammeter).

Just a guess.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on February 17, 2014, 04:41:26 AM
Hi Fellows,

Great topic and some extremely interesting discussions and information.

One brief observation/comment: "Also" consider Figuera used a commutator yielding Staircase Step Functions to drive the induction coils. These "STEPS" likely contained very steep rise and fall times especially considering the only capacitance found in his circuits appear to be the inductor coil internal winding capacitance. Note that many OU (COP > 1) applications involve disruptive transitions [spark gaps or other fast dV/dt apparatus]. Therefore this feature might be worth keeping in mind as you pursue the Back EMF mitigation aspects.

Also, there's a very talented and excellent Lecturer named Michel van Biezen (Lectures On Line) who has a Youtube channel that is probably well worth taking the time to review and refresh your Electricity and Magnetism recollection. The following six lectures may be of great interest:

Physics - Electromagnetic Induction: Faraday's Law (4 total)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejRJM-kCyWQ&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejRJM-kCyWQ&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i80TIzF9D88&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i80TIzF9D88&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHzpPyxK6a8&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHzpPyxK6a8&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atbioBvN8hE&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atbioBvN8hE&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)

and; Physics - Electromagnetic Induction: Faraday's Law and Lenz Law (2 total)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-aoGz5X_j0&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-aoGz5X_j0&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUcQqHsQjqg&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUcQqHsQjqg&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)

Or, subscribe as this fellow is "as good as they get" and his channel is a great engineering/physics/chemistry/etc. reference source.

I can appreciate that some in this blog have a reservation regarding the "formal" sciences but hey, every bit of help is appreciated - we're all in this together!

Have a productive week...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 17, 2014, 07:21:52 AM

hi..  all

NRamaswami stated some where ( i forgot ) that he was helped by some electrical engineer,
so pre-assumed that there was no wrong measurement, maybe only miss communication.
 
however, any sketch/drawing "how to use ampmeter and voltmeter" from gyulasun or others should be good to posted, i agree with what you said gyulasun about measurement. i have ever seen from webpage someone measure amperage by connecting ampmeter to output directly.

i guess, only with sketch/drawing will reduce miss communication, as Alvaro_CS (thanks for drawing) who have posted "drawing" help us to look it as start point. those all will save much time from reading and arguing everything. and also, English is not my daily language, sorry for that.

...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 17, 2014, 08:33:03 AM
just guessing here ...but maybe it would be possible to use electric kettle resistive heating elements ( for example from scrap yard )  in series as a resistive divider to lower voltage to 220V. It doesn't need to work for a long time just enough to connect the bank of incandescent bulbs to have clear evidence of output power. I think a few seconds is enough. What do you think ? Surely caution is required , but all that setup is cheap and can be put in some heat resistance metal box grounded and insulated from outside, and operated from distance by a switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 09:03:13 AM
Hi All:

Ammeters are always connected in series. Patrick J Kelly my mentor has advocated low voltage and low amperage to give to devices and those devices did not work. For they were huge the and input voltage and amperage was less to make any effect at low frequency.

We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. So what Newton tells me makes sense.

Even wikipedia says that Lenz law does not apply to charges that are opposite to each other is not included in the textbooks.

Actually Tinselkoala appears to be a very knowledgeable person with a lot of hands on experience. He initially rejected the idea that the inductor itself would not transmit the electricity to the primary and the current stops dead in the electromagnet without going to the load lamps but then very quickly figured it out why it does that and gave a very cogent  and convincing explanation that the resistance of the iron rods becomes very high and the magnetism would be very high and electricity may not show at all in the lamps..He has also shown the Tesla coil to claim that it has an input of 75 watts and an output of 30000 watts. Whether that 30000 watts is useable energy or not he has not answered. But I believe that it is useable energy. How we can use that.. Let me try to answer that..

What I have seen at 50 Hz ( I repeat the frequency for it is very important and not understood in Electricity) current is, as we give higher voltage the electromagnet performs well to produce output in the secondary. If we give 440 volts and 4 amps in the primary, it would then produce a very significantly higher voltage in the step up transformer set up of Figuera but because the stepped up voltage would also increase the amperage in the device, the output amperage would also be higher..

Now the other friend has just pointed out that the other designs all have a steep spike and then a steep dive things in other devices of this type. This is essentially done to increase the frequency. the rotary device has 16 points for making sparks and sparks turn the frequency in to very high frequency.

I can show two patents on the importance of frequency. A common sense approach.  I can say that if we use a bicycle dynamo if we petal faster the bulb would glow brighter. From practical experience I'm making this statement.

When we petal the cycle faster, the dynamo magnet rotates very fast and it increases the rate of rotation or increases the rate of change of magnetic flux and therefore the induced emf being directly proportional to the rate of change of magnetic flux increases. When the induced emf increases the output increases. Increasing the rate of change of magnetic flux is increasing the frequency. Nothing more. Nothing less. So higher the frequency of the input current, greater would be the output. The Tesla coil that produces 30000 watts output at 75 watts probably uses Radio frequencies. There is no magic to that. 

However iron core would heat up so much at high frquencies and it is not practical to have an iron core based transformers at high frquencies. There is a common notion that iron would not respond to frequencies above 500 cycles or 1000 cycles. But I have taken information from a Prof who teaches Metallurgy that iron would respond at high frequencies to generate magnetism but would heat up enromously.

Now the Tesla coil actually agitates the atmosphere and has an earth connection. We have all seen the 1901 patent of Tesla on Radiant Energy Apparatus. As simple as it sounds, if you give high voltage high frequency current to the plate on the top and then loop the wire down, put the current through a series of capacitors immersed in salt water and then through the other end connect it to the earth again using a lot of coils for the wire. This is nothing but tesla coil in the reverse.

Now the current can be taken both from the capacitors as DC and from the earth connection. The output would be far higher than the input.

Now you check US8004250 Pyramid Electric Generator where a Pyramid configuration declared as an essential ingredient of this set up. There you have a USPTO patent for a device which claims 100 times the output as the input and uses the same principles as above by giving high voltage. It gives a low inital voltage but then steps it up to high voltage using a step up Tesla coil to the capacitor and then gives it to the Tesla antenna plate. It takes the output from near the ground point.

If you look at the patent of Don Smith which was rejected which projected that capacitors in series loaded on a high voltage high frequency rod without the opposing primary, it is also based on the same above principles. That opposite primary is a missing thing in the  patent of Don Smith.

All these things are common. Figuera's original device also has the spark plugs in the form of the rotary device and in the form of the resistor array combination for steep hike and steep dive for frequency increase of the interrupted dc current.

It is very difficult to perform that particular rotary device. It probably required a very custom design and custom built to his specifications but essentially that is the real purpose of the device. That is where many of us have failed. I have also tried to replicate exactly as he did and then failed and then I realized that the device was manufactured in Pre world war I Germany which was known for its precision work and the manufacturer wanted to know why Figuera wanted this device and Figuera would not let them take a look at his set up.. This is there all in the Newspapers. So a very competent manufacturer custom built this rotary device for Figuera to his specifications and this is why the device worked. Pre World War Germany was an industrial power known for its perfection in Engineering to this day..So we have all failed in replicating the rotary device..

Having understood the purpose of the rotary device, I made it a simple Ac mains drive device. As we realized that if we give mains voltage, it takes a lot of amps automatically to drive high output in the set up.

There is a problem here. The Inductor -capacitor theory states that as the Electric field collapses the magnetic field increases and as the magnetic field collapses the electric field increases. In other words you need to have a weak magnet, that is highly vibrating to get high output in secondary and that is achieved at low frequencies by using high voltage. If you use high voltage and high frequencies, the input current would drop for the output amps would increase if you increase the input frequency..But such devices would not produce useable electricity unless the set up of Radiant energy appratus of Tesla is used. The capacitor converts this to DC and this can be charged to battery and then the battery can use an inverter to give out useable electricity. I think Tesla also used high power capacitors immersed in salt water or solvents but that is now considered a lost science. That lost science is a key to mastering energy production.

The key here is that either you must increase the voltage:Amperage ratio at fixed frequency. (That is dangerous at low frequency of the mains. But that low frequency is needed as majority of the machinaries are made up of steel and only then it is useable.) or you must increase the frequency to increase the output. Increasing the frequency is impractical for we have devices made up of iron and other metals which may heat up by using electricity at high frequency.

Now you check the claims of Figuera that where is the electricity coming from? It comes from the interactions of the atmosphere and the magnetic field of the earth..It makes sense. I'm theorizing and certainly I have not carried out these experiments but you can see you tube videos of copper and aluminium plate capacitors which are round shaped and which are separated by a rubber strip and then immersed in salt water generating electricity to run a computer fan.

Tineselkoala has not answered my question whether the energy of his 30000 watts output and 75 watts input  can be used at all and the answer is yes it can be used and it can be done only through the process of electrostatics and not magnetics. The key for that is the Teslas patent on method of using Radiant Energy apparatus.  But he can very well say that I'm saying all this as theory and he is perfectly correct in that for I have not done the experiments but given this information a lot of people can do a lot of things now..Again I guess so..You can very well say these are wild guesses and not experimental observations and you are perfectly correct in that..I have not validated any one of these things..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 17, 2014, 11:12:28 AM
Hi All:

Ammeters are always connected in series. Patrick J Kelly my mentor has advocated low voltage and low amperage to give to devices and those devices did not work. For they were huge the and input voltage and amperage was less to make any effect at low frequency.

We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. So what Newton tells me makes sense.

Even wikipedia says that Lenz law does not apply to charges that are opposite to each other is not included in the textbooks.

...........


hi.. NRamaswami

thanks for sharing here.

last time you said,  you  measured without load,
my question is.
 
- did you connect both terminal of analog ampmeter when you measure the amperage to output?
- did you measure amperage and voltage at once or separately?
 
Please born in mind, everyone only want to know how you make it,
at least me, i can not be patient.    :) 
short answer will be very appreciated.   

About TK, it was a joke, example, you can find  build-up amplifier in electronics store, where output will be labeled 3000 watts , input  only consume 100 - 200 watts.
but, you can see after 3000 watts there is a big letter "PMPO" .
newton II or someone else have  explanation about this. i forget  the reply number.

thanks again.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 01:29:26 PM
Hi:

The input is like this..

Input wire - Ammeter one terminal 1 - Ammeter other terminal - Input wire to load Phase or mains or live wire..

Ammeter one Terminal 1 above - Voltmeter terminal 1 - voltmeter terminal 2 - Neutral wire.

In other words we connected the ammeter in series and voltmeter in parallel. We had a trained electrician Narayanan who passed away due to illness.

You can go here to see how we connect the Ammeter and voltmeter and all your doubts would be over..

http://www.tmptens.com/agricultural-water-turbine/

There are five videos and the meters set up is clear there. It is a water turbine for agricultural pumpsets. The bespectacled man who is lean and who wears a green shirt is Narayanan..He is no more now..



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 02:10:19 PM

 ... we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses.



Those are the clear indications that you are drawing more current from input mains.  With this method you can never say whether your output power is more than input power because megawatts of power will be available in power supply mains.   We cannot rely on measurements due to various reasons.

The best way to verify your device would be :


1) Get one motor- alternator set having standard power output

2) Start the motor by connecting it to lab power supply

3) Take the alternator output and connect it to your figuira device.

4) If figuira device output is 630 Volts,  reduce it to motor voltage using a stepdown transformer.

5) Now connect the output power from your device to motor in synchronisation with existing power supply.

6) Finally disconnet the input from lab power supply.

If output power of your device is more than the input,   the entire setup now should run on its own without taking any power input from any external source.   So, you have a ever running overunity device. (setup)

Wish you best of luck.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 17, 2014, 02:12:51 PM
Hello All

First time posting here...
Will read the previous posts

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 17, 2014, 02:13:20 PM
hi..  all

NRamaswami stated some where ( i forgot ) that he was helped by some electrical engineer,
so pre-assumed that there was no wrong measurement, maybe only miss communication.
 
however, any sketch/drawing "how to use ampmeter and voltmeter" from gyulasun or others should be good to posted, i agree with what you said gyulasun about measurement. i have ever seen from webpage someone measure amperage by connecting ampmeter to output directly.

i guess, only with sketch/drawing will reduce miss communication, as Alvaro_CS (thanks for drawing) who have posted "drawing" help us to look it as start point. those all will save much time from reading and arguing everything. and also, English is not my daily language, sorry for that.

...

Hi Marsing,

I edited Alvaro's schematic and included input and output voltage and current meters. 

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 02:26:45 PM
Forest:

I have already tested the output in a safe way..I have indicated that the output voltage under such conditions is reduced to 240 volts and 250 volts. That is a very inefficient set up but a safe set up. I have already indicated that as the voltage keeps increasing the wattage starts dramatically shooting up beyond 240 volts. that increase would continue at a higher rate at 630 volts.

I cannot take your suggestion to test like that. I can safely say put up about 80 x200 watts lamps in series and lit them all together and see what is the voltage. If one of the fuses out all of them would not work. If we put all of them in parallel we need to device an expensive board.

But that is a risk we can safely take. But rather than all that I would prefer to do a step down transformer and check the output of the step down one in a safe way. Output even in step down method would not diminish in this configuration. Amps would go up and voltage would come down. I will try a self sustaining replication and explain as to how all hav to be wound and then explain how and why it happens. As I understand it which may well be incorrect.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 17, 2014, 02:45:22 PM
Hi Gyula:

You see the picture of the Ammeter at the bottom. Up to 5 amps I would not know what is the amperage. I have better ones than this but they are little more costly. I can order what is needed over the phone.
....

Hi NRamaswami,

Yes, you are correct that up to 5 Ampers the meter (I gave the link to) has no scale to see how many Amps flow below 5A but this is a 30A moving iron type ammeter, this is why it has a small nonlinearity in its scale.  There are such meters with 5A full deflection or 3A full deflection  but I know that we all do not like to use so many meters.  The problem is that moving iron or moving coil  analog meters  usually are not so precise in the first 20-30% of their full scale.     
Perhaps you have a normal digital hand held AC/DC multimeter with true RMS measurement feature for AC, these have a 10 or even 20A current measuring range which can serve nicely below 5A currents once you most likely have a sinusoid 50 HZ AC output. 

When using bulbs for the load, they have a cold resistance which is much much lower value than the hot resistance, this is a reason why the input or the output current is very high at the switch-on moment.   A solution could be to use 5 to 10 bulbs of identical wattage each in series and after the switch-on moments when these bulbs work with say half brightness you could short circuit some of them (with a switch) to increase the load on the output i.e. let 3 or 4 bulbs work from the 600-700V output.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 02:53:29 PM
Newton II:

All that is going to cost a lot of money and I do not have it here now..We have an economic problem and nearly 300 clients are not paying my bills and slowing down payment.. All are honest to the core people and all are having problem..So I can not invest money in this set up.

I will do a simple wires only set up. Give it a one shot current for a second.. Then remove it. If the device continues to produce electricity afteer the source power is removed, then you have a self sustaining generator..That is fairly simple to do than the expensive method you describe. The output would be lower but it would continuously come. As a proof of concept device. If that is fine, then I can do that. What output would come, I do not know now but I'm not really bothered about it either. Any continuous output should satisfy all including me.
Is that ok..give me four or five days..

But please do test at increased voltage to the device. You would know for yourself. However remember the fact. Magnets act as focussing point for getting electricity from the atmosphere. So the larger the magnetic core, whether it remains stagnant or rotating the larger would be the output. I have already explained in my earlier long post what is the role of the frequency and voltage in producing output as I understand it now..Let me build a small device and then let us see.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 17, 2014, 03:29:34 PM
NRamaswami Properly wound coil does not need capacitors.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 03:35:06 PM

I will do a simple wires only set up. Give it a one shot current for a second.. Then remove it. If the device continues to produce electricity afteer the source power is removed, then you have a self sustaining generator..That is fairly simple to do than the expensive method you describe. The output would be lower but it would continuously come. As a proof of concept device. If that is fine, then I can do that. What output would come, I do not know now but I'm not really bothered about it either. Any continuous output should satisfy all including me.
Is that ok..give me four or five days..


That would be fine.  No need for any time limit.  Take your own time and give us the feedback.   But how will you inject 'one shot current for a second'  in a short circuit ? 

To make the device self sustaining, you have to connect output terminals from secondary to the input terminals of primary.   When you inject ' one shot current' ,  this current will pass through both primary and secondary wires but for your device to work,  you have to see that ' one shot current'  passes only through primary wire.   How will you achieve it ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 03:51:21 PM
Bride rectifier at feedback would make the current not to flow back to the feedback unit. It becomes pulsed DC then. Pulsed DC is less efficient then AC but since it is feedback, it is ok. Otherwise we need to use the method of Amplidyne patents where the initial current is fixed and the feedback is given as 1 volt to add as pulsed DC feedback. For each watt of feedback, amplidyne patents claim an increase of 20000 watts of output increase in secondary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 04:31:41 PM
Pulsed DC is not same as AC.  When you use pulsed DC the idea of transformer itself will be lost. This device with primary and secondary is a transformer and your current has to be AC only. Better consult an electrical engineer for solution.

Good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 04:35:03 PM
Newton II:'

Your question itself is wrong. Primary and secondary currents go in the opposite directions and phases and would not merge. Feedback units is a different thing. Feedback must be in phase with primary input so whether the current goes in both directions intially really irrelevant. It is the lack of information on feedback unit that keeps all this things a mysterious device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 17, 2014, 04:36:53 PM
................
We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. ................

thanks Gyula, i hope that NRamaswami use that setup for his device.

One more question NRamaswami,
can you say the rate of fuses ? ie 5A or 10A

I will wait your result in a week or two.

thanks...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
We have used fuses from 2 amps to 15 amps. Current fuse is 15 amps and it stays intact as the primary current has never been in excess of 10 amps. Secondary no fuse..But I'm not going to post back any replies as it takes a lot of my time. Bye until next week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 06:20:23 PM
I saw one post from Newton II: Transformerw would not work with Pulsed DC. totally wrong.

Transformers work with Pulsed DC. Full sign wave pulsed DC would make transformers work. Some how the efficiency is lower than AC. That is all.

We are testing methods of windings that reduces the impedance loss. Possibly we need to lacquar the iron rods once to reduce heat loss as hysterisis. But that is expensive for me. With ineffficient methods, the device produced at least as accepted here 630 volts. I know that when the secondary produces 250 volts at no load the voltage at load is 120 volts and 2 amps and when the secondary produces 240 volts at no load the useful power is 100 volts and 1.8 amps. As the voltage in the secondary increases, the vibratons of the core increases and this must lead to higher output. But let us test and then see the results.

I will try to create a smaller version of the device by the end of this week.  Thanks to you all and Bye for now.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 18, 2014, 01:22:09 AM

 describes in one line for using a secondary under the primary to get industrial scale currents. ...

...Possibly all of you have focused only on the drawings and have not studied the patent description of the original and missed the line.


Patent No. 30378 (year 1902) literally states:

"The current dynamos, come from groups of Clarke machines, and our generator recalls, in its fundamental principle, the Ruhmkorff induction coil.  ...

...As much as we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of these coils from which differs completely. ...

...the motionless induced circuit placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets."



Figuera mentioned the Ruhmkorff coil twice for some reason...   Maybe now we can guess why he did it.

Thank you NRamaswami for de-encrypting the patent !!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 18, 2014, 03:02:25 AM
The following link shows the setup for the driver I am using in the 1908 device. See this photo for setup #1:
 https://imageshack.com/i/euodzpj (https://imageshack.com/i/euodzpj)
The waveform corresponds to a load of two 50 Ohms/100W resistors instead of the primary coils. I am using seven rheostats each rated 20 Ohms/25W. This is an improvement with respect to fixed power resistors for avoiding re-soldering, every time a different resistor value is needed.
I ran an experiment to observe how critical is the matching of the values of the seven resistors and the reactance of the primary coils. I started with each rheostat having a value of 7 Ohms, which produced an output voltage of about 14 Vac. See this photo for setup #3:
 https://imageshack.com/i/0nt3urj (https://imageshack.com/i/0nt3urj)
 The output increased to about 19Vac when the rheostats were changed to 12 Ohms. See this photo for setup #4:
https://imageshack.com/i/5b39cej
And finally, the output increased to about 25 Vac when the rheostats were changed to 20 Ohms. See this photo for setup #5:
 https://imageshack.com/i/nfa8y0j (https://imageshack.com/i/nfa8y0j)
 Another adjustment that was made based on the interpretation of the patent description about keeping the cores in contact but not in communication. I made the cores touch each other but without having electrical continuity. I used an Ohmmeter and measured open circuit between the three iron cores. That is, I have a minimum air gap of about the thickness of the insulating coating of the silicone steel sheets. I also verified that there was not cross-talking between the two primary coils. See the oscilloscope’s graphs in this photo:
 https://imageshack.com/i/7gr8yrj (https://imageshack.com/i/7gr8yrj)
 I HAVE NOT YET TESTED OVERUNITY! I want to optimize the electrical parameters, first.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 18, 2014, 03:57:05 AM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/):


All you need is to power one 7 watt cfl light bulb in a self sustaining way.
That would galvanize the entire overunity community in a flash.
You don't need to spend lots of money.
Just show us a self runner.
No need for any measurements at all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 18, 2014, 04:16:42 AM
With the winding of the secondary under the primary thing. I think that will increase the coupling of the primary to secondary and the load on the secondary will reflect to the primary just as in any other transformer.

Here is a document just to get folks up to speed on how a transformer works. http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm

If you're not already a  transformer expert and you don't read the document linked above a few times then there is only one person to blame.  Anyone professing to be an expert that says anything that goes against that document, they get no ear from me.

Quote
At no load, an ideal transformer draws virtually no current from the mains, since it is simply a large inductance. The whole principle of operation is based on induced magnetic flux, which not only creates a voltage (and current) in the secondary, but the primary as well!  It is this characteristic that allows any inductor to function as expected, and the voltage generated in the primary is called a 'back EMF' (electromotive force). The magnitude of this voltage is such that it almost equals (and is effectively in the same phase as) the applied EMF.

Good luck.
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 04:42:02 AM
Hi All:

I saw Farmhand's posts about a book..I don't go by books.. I go by my experimental results. I have not seen any book that says you need a particular voltage:amperage ratio for the secondary to start functioning effectively. We found out from experience.  What we share are the experimental results. Not abcd is stated in xyz book..I'm not an Electrical Engineer and I do not understand the page long calculations and so I ignore them all and trust my experimental results and then move on from there to do other experiments.

I agreed with newton II and also informed that we lost nearly 100 fuzes..So you well know that we have done a lot of work.

We will present the experimental results.. If they are not greater output than input also we will put it here..When I have the honesty to say all this what is my problem? I have no problem.. Really not worried if One member will not give me an ear..I am least bothered really if one member will not listen to me.. Experimental results that any one can replicate will be posted..

And I have asked how many of you have converted an iron to a permanent magnet and I have not received an answer. That is kept a secret.

So I do not care about much of other books. I do not care about what abcd theory says or xyz says.. All I care to see is what is the experimental results. Does it makes common sense? Can we go further without taking risks..

I will devise a safe method to test the high voltage output step down by a transformer and then giving it to a load by putting about 100 x 200 watts bulbs in parallel and keeping all of them on. give power to the primary to induce the secondary and then the step down transformer. Let us wait and see what the voltmeter and Ammeter show on the load. We will then know what happens.. What is the output wattage and what is the input wattage.. We will then see.. Do I have any thing to lose if I say look what we have got is less than the input..Nothing..

Do I have any thing to gain by saying look what I have got is more than the input. Again nothing..

I share the results with the community.. Nothing more and Nothing less. Will it change the world. I do not know and I do not think so..For I have got only two people indicating that they would attempt to replicate the experiments. And NewtonII who appears to be very experienced felt that the flux would be additive in the central core which is what should happen as that portion uses the forces of magnetic attraction.

The problem is all of you have studied theories and machines that use only forces of magnetic repulsion.

Figuera advocated a totally more efficient concept of using forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction combined to get a greater outpt than the input. If one module does not produce the results, we need to give the output of first module to the second and so on. All this increases the input voltage:amperage ratio. This is why I clearly mentioned at fixed low frequency of 50 hz, if you want to get better results increased the input voltage:amperage ratio but the amperage should be reasonbly ok, in the 5 to 10 amps range for magnetism to be effective. I have given all information..And I have said that larger the core size, longer the core and longer the number of wires and higher the number of turns all these things work..

Check Magnetic field strength in any book.. It would say Magnetic field strength = Number of Amperes x Number of turns.. Is there any mention of the need for higher voltage there..

Look at the inductor capacitor theory: As the magnetic field collapses, the electric field increases..As the electric field collapses the magnetic field increses..What does that mean.. A low magnetic field that can create high induced emf will result in a high electric field..This is borne out by our experiments. But if you give milliamps and 100,000 volts you would not see any results.. Input amps must be adequate to create a reasonable amount of magnetism, a low level magnetism to produce electric field.

Have you bought and open a bottle dynamo used in bicycles.. See that the magnet that rotates in dynamos is of very low magnetic strength. That is desired to produced current..

Any way I think we can build a self sustaining generator and give it a one shot electric current and make it continuously produce electric current. Then I will provide the full construction methods and why it works and how it works..That is if It works as I anticipate now. Many of my anticipations have been knocked out by experimental results and so I go only by experimental results..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 18, 2014, 08:21:33 AM

NRamaswami
This setup I saw many times and even tried to replicate BUT it was always on one core, that's why I always failed. I believe this is big step forward because of gaps between cores, but how big they are ?
Could someone more well-read confirm my feeling ? It's about EMF (electromagnetic force) created when magnetic field changes. The same is acting in Rhumkorff coil I believe. Now... if two primaries generate EMFs in secondaries and they  match and add ! , while EMFs generated by any change in magnetic field (by load) in secondaries to the primaries will nullify (being equal and opposite) then we have  lenz-free setup. In such setup the max output is dependent probably on factors like magnetizing current flowing in primary and the saturation point of cores. I believe that is purely Hubbard design, he looped it back to itself , has given the initial big current pulse and it worked indefinitely near the point of saturation of cores. That would be very good and limit the maximum output voltage, however itis only a theory...According to newspapers he used also two additional windings, one probably on the center core and one around all others. The one outside (if existed) reminds me Steven Mark control coil which safetly limited the rising of voltage on output and the one in center I have a feeling was somehow related to the method of starting device. maybe all transformers primaries were in series and that one in center was the middle and used to start-up by initial current impulse ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 08:35:21 AM
Hi Forest:

Air gaps were present. How big they are -  I have not measured nor bothered.

and whether they have any effect. - I do not know.

What is Steven Mark control coil  - Can you post information and pictures on that..Would be obliged.

Hubbard design - I'm working on it. When it starts working I will post pictures and how to construct etc..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 18, 2014, 09:52:33 AM
It is correct that when you provide air gap between cores, it causes addition of fluxes produced by all three solenoids. But when you provide air gap between solenoids, the fluxes produced by solenoids will not flow as freely as when without air gap because iron being a very strong magnetic material holds the flux within itslef and will not allow the flux to pass through the air gap and reach the next core.  To compensate for this you have to pass a very strong current through primary producing stronger flux. ( somewhere NRS has mentioned that 'higher the voltage higher will be output'. Higher voltage will cause higher current depending on power availability producing stronger flux).

If you want to make it self-running,  the number of turns in secondary should be corresponding to the current required by primary.  So you have to correctly design the core, number of turns in primary and secondary with suitable air gap.  If not you may have to do several 'trial and errors'  before you end up with something interesting.

Just by meddling with few wires and iron rods you cannot make a working device.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 11:37:54 AM
Hi Newton II:

I think there is a miscommunication here. What do you mean by air gap?

By air cap I meant that there is an air cap between the outer plastic tubes on which we wound wires. Iron rods are continuous. Same rod may go between two different solenoids. There is no air gap between iron rods but between the plastic tubes that are P1,S and P2. We simply dumb the rods and then hammer them to be very tightly fit. There may be air gaps between rods but not exactly at the points you mention..It is not built like that..You see iron rods are cut to 17 inches. Plastic tubes are cut to 18 inches and then we ensure that no air gap between iron rods are present as that creates a lot of noise. If all iron rods are very tightly packed the noise is reduced. In that respect there is no air gap between in the iron core in the junctions of P1,S and P2. Air gap exists between the plastic tubes for they are cut tubes.


And we cannot have two iron rods with opposite poles standing with air gaps. Against common sense. Magnets with opposite poles with be attracted to each other and stick to each other. Whether they are permanent magnets or electromagnets..


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 11:46:41 AM
Hi Newton II:

When you say self running... Do you mean to say that we must provide exact wattage consumed by the primary back to the primary for it to self run or in exact voltage:amperage combination apart from exact wattage.. For example if I provide the feedback from a lower voltage and higher amperage but similar wattage as feedback from thick wires,  would it become higher voltage lower amperage combination automatically due to the fact that the primary has thinner and so higher resistance wires..Can you clarify on this point please.. I'm obliged..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 18, 2014, 12:07:00 PM
You can find some information about Steven Mark TPU here : http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Steve_Marks_Toroid_Generator Nobody knows the details , like for many OU devices, but Steven MArk has given enough information to realize that it is a self-running ,self-feeding device composed of coils alone.The control coils are there to limit the output voltage as in other case it will immediately vaporise due to extensive power runaway. I found in one newspaper about Hubbard description of a wires wound around the device, maybe for the same purpose (to contradict runaway action by magnetic field resistance?) All that is not much important as it is only my intuition...


Can you clarify that you have 3 separate coils each of his own PVC tube ? How they are connected , glued together ? Previosuly I thought that it was all on one single PVC tube with 3 cores inside.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 01:49:33 PM
Hi:

What you call as steven Mark coil is MOLINA-MARTINEZ, Alberto coil.. It is nothing but a Hubbard coil. No patent granted for it  for it is a violation of Law of Conservation of Energy. No Steven Mark coil but it is a MOLINA-MARTINEZ coil..Patent was obviously refused. This is nothing but a three phase Figuera device. In fact the Figuera device itself could be three phase but because I do not understand Electrical Engineering and three phase, I made it a single phase one. The output I recorded is correct from the information on this coil. All videos have disappeared but I located the patents. They are based on the way the Earth works. It is a 24 coil Hubbard coil rather than a 8 outer coil Hubbard coil..Your description of runaway control is wrong but it does it differently.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 18, 2014, 03:08:58 PM

Do you mean to say that we must provide exact wattage consumed by the primary back to the primary for it to self run or in exact voltage:amperage combination apart from exact wattage.. For example if I provide the feedback from a lower voltage and higher amperage but similar wattage as feedback from thick wires,  would it become higher voltage lower amperage combination automatically due to the fact that the primary has thinner and so higher resistance wires..Can you clarify on this point please.. I'm obliged..



1) Think that starting input wattage is 'X' and output wattage is 6X (as you said earlier 6 to 8 times),  send some  1.5X watts back to     
     input primary assuming for losses and balance 4.5X watts you can make use of.

2) Instead of connecting secondary directly to primary, connect it through step down or step up transformer as the case may be to get
    exact voltage required by primary.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 03:31:36 PM
Hi:

Thanks.. We will try to rebuild it. It may take till Saturday or Next Monday. I will come back after that. We will first check whether the output is exactly 6x times as all are doubting the 20 amps output figure. We will check if the doubts are valid or if we made a real breakthrough. We will simply report the facts. If the voltage is very high we will step it down.. That will take building a custom built transformer to reduce the voltage to 220 volts and then connecting to load to check what is the output. If that output is positively 6 to 8 times higher as I believe it should be, then we will try for the self sustaining part. Others can also come up in the meanwhile with their results. They can validate or negate my results. ok. I think this is fair for now. Let me now focus on my work.. Bye.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 18, 2014, 09:09:40 PM
Hallo People!
A very good job going there :)
my 2 cents
Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 19, 2014, 12:13:46 AM
Hi all,

As refered previously in the forum the patent US119825 by Daniel McFarland Cook also used concentric wound coils.

I have looked for that patent and in the text is referenced a circuit "D" which does not appear in the available figure. Maybe there is a missing figure where this circuit is represented. What do you think?

http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm (http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 19, 2014, 12:32:10 AM
Just thought i would add my 2 cents. have been fallowing Figueras for some time now and i have designed my own timing board that really blows PJK out of the water. what most people don't understand is that the 4017B decade counter has built in overlap capabilities. as one channel is coming down the next is coming up and so timing overlap caps are probably needed but i designed it in the board just in case. most designs on the internet have a blinking secondary output which means that there is no timing overlap what so ever in which figueras specifically said needs to happen(make before you break).  i have 9 channels because i didn't like the awfull stair step people were getting. 1-9 5 being 0 volts. the board is capable of 60 to 500 hz or more with 20 or so milliamp with 7805. it has a centel grounding pin on the IDC connector for people that want to use opto isolators and it has isolation on main power. board was made with DipTrace free and is 4"x 2.3"2 layers. 1 % metal film resisters and poly film caps all ic's cmos. the transistor are MJ11028's ran through a adjustable vitreous wound resistor  from NTE. i will post more as my build continues  and will post video on youtube soon.check out attached pic. may all of you have success
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 12:58:27 AM
Hi:

I'm informed by Hannon that all of you thought that there should be an air gap between the South Pole of P1 and North Pole of secondary. I apologize for the air gap confusion. I fail to understand how two powerful electromagnetic cores with opposite poles can be kept apart. That will require a tremendous effort.

The air gaps I mentioned are the ones between the two plastic tubes. There is a slight air gap between the tubes. It need not be present and the whole thing can be constructed on a 5 foot or 6 foot long single tube. For ease of construction we cut the tubes. Nothing more. The presence or absence of the slight gap between the tubes is irrelevant for the function of the device.

The Figuera device as done by me is an extremely simple device. But the dimensions and the wire sizes must be kept in mind. You cannot build a cat and should not say why it does not weigh or behave like a Tiger. To make some thing to become a Tiger, you must build that like a Tiger.

You can use a 3 inch dia or 4 inch dia or 5 inch dia plastic tube and build the device. I promise you that the results will be there if you try to replicate but the size of the device and the wire gauge used and the length of the wire we used and the number of turns must all be there to see a similar performance. This will require a lot of effort and you will need a lot of labour help. It is not a one man job. But as I said the voltages are very high and the amperages are going to be high and it is deadly and you need to be careful. You must do the replication at your own risk and must take all safety precautions.

I have already filed a provisional patent application for the device disclosed and I will file a complete specification and a PCT application and then would provide step by step construction details and what are the details needed.

Whether it can become a self sustaining device I cannot say now but I can say that the device will output more watts than input watts. That much can be promised.

I again apologize for the air gaps confusion.

Regards,

Ramaswami





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 19, 2014, 02:18:41 AM

 I fail to understand how two powerful electromagnetic cores with opposite poles can be kept apart. That will require a tremendous effort.


Fix the three rods to a single base frame using clamps, bolts and nuts.  Clamps will hold the rods tightly in place. No  'tremendous effort' is required.



You cannot build a cat and should not say why it does not weigh or behave like a Tiger. To make some thing to become a Tiger, you must build that like a Tiger.


I think you are doing the same thing.   Seeing the cat through a magnifying glass and getting illusioned  that it is a Tiger!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 03:06:20 AM
"I think you are doing the same thing.   Seeing the cat through a magnifying glass and getting illusioned  that it is a Tiger!"

Thanks..Regarding the bolded part.. Perform the repeatabillity of the experiment and share your results. What you think is irrelevant if you do not or would not perform experiment and share the results. 

This is not a single rod to be fixed by nuts and bolts. Do you know how many rods are needed to pack a 4 inch dia plastic tube. Try packing it and then you would know the number of iron rods needed and the weight of the soft iron. So you think you would make two massive 4 inch dia soft iron electromagnets of 2 Tesla with opposite poles and they would remain in place with a clamp, nut and bolt.. At least when you think, please properly think..There is a difference between thinkers and performers.

"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword, clearly has never been under any automatic fire- Gen Dougles"

Don't share your thoughts. Please do perform and share the results of your expriments. Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 19, 2014, 03:39:54 AM

This is not a single rod to be fixed by nuts and bolts. Do you know how many rods are needed to pack a 4 inch dia plastic tube. Try packing it and then you would know the number of iron rods needed and the weight of the soft iron. So you think you would make two massive 4 inch dia soft iron electromagnets of 2 Tesla with opposite poles and they would remain in place with a clamp, nut and bolt.. At least when you think, please properly think..There is a difference between thinkers and performers.


What I said is just an example.  If it is not possible to fix the rods using clamps, you have to think of some other methods. You are talking about few rods,  I have fixed pumps and motors weighing 5 to 10 tons to base frames using power bolts and nuts. Nothing is impossible in fabrication.

Your postings clearly show that you neither have book (theoritical) knowledge nor fabrication knowledge.  You are not miscommunicating but just getting confused without knowledge.

Don't think that members of this forum are fools. They are intelligents enough to understand things without performing experiments.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 19, 2014, 04:23:28 AM
Steel rods as a core would not be a good choice I don't think, because the ends of the cores will face each other and any loose rods will try to move when the coils are energized not just together but also they will probably try to repel as well depending of phase differences. And as well as that the rod cores will have a lot of air gaps still present.

A small gap can be maintained between cores by using paper or something in between the cores, but then that would be a paper gap and not an air gap.

Here's a suggestion to use the rods though, take one piece of tube that holds all the rods cut to length for all the cores or as many as can be got from one length of rods (bundle).

Line the inside of the pipe with a coating of oil or something like that to stop the glue sticking to the pipe (former) if you want to remove the rods bundle from the pipe that is if not let it stick.

Ok so you have a bundle of steel rods and a tube as you fill the tube with rods use some glue to glue them all together (and to the tube if desired), leave to dry so that all rods are leveled at the ends. Now you have one big core set solid inside a insulating pipe (former) that you can cut into whatever sized pieces you want without needing to cut a lot of rods. And everything is held solid in one piece. Then to prevent any movement you can use a piece of paper between the cores and use wooden blocks behind the cores to stop any repulsion vibration "movement of any significance".

Best way to cut would be with drop saw or with a "metal 'Steel' cutting disc" on a grinder, which is inherently dangerous, be careful. They make really thin ones now that cut real good but are more fragile. For safety be prepared for the disc to fracture and fly apart sending pieces at high velocity towards your chest and neck/head, if your not ready for that, then you're not ready. Suit up and full face shield.

Otherwise a hacksaw could be used or whatever.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 04:34:39 AM
I'm sorry I never said or indicated any one here is not intelligent. Simply calculate the force needed to keep two 50 kg electromagnets of 2 T with their opposite poles facing each other and without touching them with an air gap between them. And then visualize if my mini lab could have the facility to have such powerful devices. Is it possible or practical..Your motors and pumps are not electromagnets with opposing poles kept not to touch.

You clearly show that you have not used the forces of magnetic attraction as the magnets just instantly move towards each other and attach themselves. To keep two Neodymium magnets that have about 0.6 Tesla strength and which will weigh about 100 gms each not to touch each other when their opposite poles face each other with our bare hands or even to separate them from one another is difficult. It is done but we need to do it carefully as otherwise it will hurt the fingers.  When that is the case two electromagnets weighing 50 kg with their opposite poles not to touch..., what will be the force needed. Cranes will be needed to do that to the electromagnets. See if I would have them in my place..

Please see that I'm saying that is laughed at like Magic etc.. by others.

I must have some guts to report this kind of results. I must have some guts to say some thing that would be contrary to what would be expected. I must have done the experiments and then I'm posting the results here, a place of posters acknowledged with an open mind.  And I must have some guts to show simple, a very simple device that uses both the forces of magnetic attraction and repulsion and combine them which is not done today.

Granted that I have no theoretical background and it is openly acknowledged by me. But Figuera was a Professor of reputaton. What I have done is to de-codify his careful words and modified the whole set up, deliberately made complicated by him to hide the simplicity of the thing and made a simple device that can be replicated easily by any one..None of you have done that decodification..And I have disclosed the simple device. Read his interview posted by Hanon that the whole thing is very simple.

Rather than making assumptions or presumptions, do the simple to replicate experiment. If you do not have the facility or if you do want me to post the videos when it is replicated here, I would post it. When some friend demanded pictures of disassembled set up in took the photos and posted it as it is in a moment.

I look at other members here with respect. No disrepect is never intended o