Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE  (Read 1865927 times)

Offline shadow119g

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1170 on: March 29, 2014, 09:04:21 PM »
Thanks again Dieter, Marathonman, Hanon and certainly Cadman!


Doug1,

Thank you for the encouragement! Even though I neglected to
figure out how to my device self sustaining, I have the solution.
I have done the math and decided that "all" I have to do to make
my device a 120 volt AC self-runner" is to add "only" 71 more
three transformer units. This may take me a little time. I took
about two months to build a transformer winding machine
and finish the four transformer units. Since I now have the
winding machine, please wait awhile before you give me any
moor encouragement.

Shadow
 

Offline shadow119g

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1171 on: March 29, 2014, 09:26:23 PM »
Shadow,

Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?

If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system  (I_north + I_south = constant)

Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way  to make easier its understanding"

Regards

Hanon:

First of all thank you for all the work you have done. We certainly would not be where we are without your translations and research.
I only have one resistor as there is a connection between the two circular heater coils. The total ohms of the two connected coils is 42. If I disconnected the two coils they would each be about 21 ohms. 

I don't know how much total resistance is needed for the device to work properly. But I used both coils to provide the 42 ohms.

Maybe your idea of using two resistors, providing two waves is the way to
success?

If anyone is interested in more information on the little heater or "resistor," let me know.

Shadow

Offline marathonman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1172 on: March 30, 2014, 05:08:11 AM »
Dieter;

"Wouldn't it be sufficent to use a low remanence material for the Y core only? And to prevent Hysteresis, does it make a difftence wheter steel or iron is used?? I'd rather try laminates, or ferrite, or sendust or otherwise iron sawdust casting".

Yes you are correct on your assumption as the y core is the only core switching polarity and should be of good quality iron.the best material i have found for this is 4 Mill High Z GOES from www.ArnoldRolledProducts.com.  the primaries do not change polarity and it doesn't matter if there is a residual magnetism left in core.  using the later in your sentence would allow you to use rather high frequencies.  this is why i built my timing boards the way i did to experiment with higher frequencies up to 1.5 to 2 MHZ.... All low power CMOS IC's ......so basically i can go from 50HZ to 2MHZ with a cap change and two resistor adjustments (that's it). not a bad board if i say so myself.

Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1173 on: March 30, 2014, 05:21:57 AM »
Shadow


Shure I am interested. 21 Ohm sounds just right. For the resistors, I've seen an idea that goes like: several resistors in series, each side of the series is connected to one primary coil. The commutator brush delivers the current to a certain tap of the series, so depending on the position of the brush, the left side gets more current and the right one lesser, or vice versa. This needs to be in 2 half circles of resistors, whereof one is the flipped version of the other.


Also make shure the number of turns in the secondary is high enough so you get a higher voltage. Did you already test the current?


I want to show you all two Images, one is my Figuera/Heins/Jensen test setup, the other one a Heins bitorroid, that I made quickly. It is a good example for how bad materials lead to extremly bad performence. With this BTT, that was run in series with a 150 Watt lamp at the 230V 50 hz Grid, the output was unbelievable 0 volt, 0 ampere  ;D .


Bad core and bad wire. One thing you don't have to try.
(Actually I tried it to see if it's possible to use everydays materials... it does absolutely NOT.)


Where the other device with the ferrite core and sec. wire from a MOT performs fine.




EDIT : Marathonman, 50 Hz to 2 MHz sounds great! Plenty room for sweet spots in there. Speaking of cores, I must insist:
www.ebay.com/itm/6-x4-CORE-Metglass-nanocrystalline-tape-for-MEG-generator-power-transformers-/321362215573?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ad2ae4295



Tho I must say I've seen cheaper ones. At ebay, sometimes you have to dig for a while until the better offers pop up.


see also
www.gaotune.com/c-core2.htm
a chinese manufactor, may send samples for free!
And some cheaper offers:
www.ebay.com/itm/C-Core-Output-Transformer-Materials-Hitachi-C-Core-Amorphous-Metglas-MC-Stepup-/331110263471?_trksid=p2054897.l5658






Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1174 on: March 30, 2014, 05:44:09 AM »
Marathonman,


see my EDIT note in my prev. posting.


Offline marathonman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1175 on: March 30, 2014, 03:28:45 PM »
Dieter thanks;

i was drooling over these cores. the first and second links are great but the third is way to small. i bookmarked the links and i thank you very much. yes you are right the first link was expensive and i will wait for better deal and bookmarked his store but then again you get what you paid for. Awesome Cores thanks.

Offline shadow119g

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1176 on: March 30, 2014, 04:33:07 PM »
Dieter, Cadman and Hanon:

The bottom web site on ebay appears to be the best bet until next winter!

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Pelonis-Fan-Forced-Heater-with-Thermostat/21804031 This is where I bought mine, unfortunately they are out of stock and I paid almost double the price.

This sounds about right on ebay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pelonis-Heater-Fan-Forced-white-HF0020T-Thermostat-safety-auto-shutoff-/111312785410

Sometime around last September after my first message on "re-inventing the wheel," I started looking items to build the device. I bought the heater thinking
that is would have a resistance heating element in it. I got lucky and it did.
The first picture shows the front housing and brand name of the heater.
The second picture shows the data plate.
Hanon: The third picture shows where I cut the metal strip that joins the two coils.
I know this sounds a little strange, but I cut this strip the day before you
suggested using the two coils separately for two wave forms. I cut it in an
attempt to increase the ohms of the total coil by adding resistor.
Cadman: Fourth picture: This is an aluminum plate I made to mount my new commutator. I haven't drilled the holes for mounting it to the rest of the device yet. If you would like one, I made two, I could mail you one. It uses two set screws to hold the commutator.

Shadow




Offline shadow119g

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1177 on: March 30, 2014, 07:08:14 PM »
Another possible advantage to using a heater is that you could put the
heater back together running the commutator wires out of a hole in
the plastic case then using the fan to cool the resistor while in use. I
have found that my resistive coil does not get hot so I  haven't done
this yet. Of course, that could have something to do with my low
output on my device. I hope building the new commutator will solve
some of my problems.

Shadow


Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1178 on: March 31, 2014, 12:51:07 AM »
Hi all,

I have been thinking about the possibility that Figuera´s 1908 patent have electromagnets placed with like poles facing each other.

All electric generators are based on the principle that magentic lines must cut the wires of the induced circuit.

When the electromagnets are placed with like poles facing each other, electric induction is achieved while the magnetic lines, during their swinging back and forth derived from the 2 opposite electric signals, cut the wires of the induced.

I have attached two different sketchs with possible configurations for this implementation. One is a simple configuration, while the second sketch has a closed magnetic circuit to keep the induced field inside.

Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1179 on: March 31, 2014, 01:37:08 AM »
Hanon


I tried both, but like poles gave pretty much no output, because the polarity of the induced never chanches, and the total amplitude varies not much. You can test this easily by swapping the contacts.


I know of 3 ways to achieve induction, by moving the magnet, by rotating the magnet (including polarity flip, maybe the most effective) or by fluxpath-linking/unlinking. Field lines must cut the wire as you said, but there also needs to be maximum change in time.


Your second drawing confuses me. Why would the fwd mmf jump from the outer core to the inner one? BTW., looks like a reverse BTT. If the induced were wrapped around both cores.


Nice drawing tho.
 

Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1180 on: March 31, 2014, 01:53:29 AM »
Hi,

The magnetic flux looks for the easiest way to return to the magnet, therefore when it finds an opposite flux must come out from the external core toward the internal one. The idea of the internal core is to enclose the back emf inside it without returning to the electromagnets. The wire must be placed between both sides in order to be cut by the "moving" magnetic lines.

Dieter, from your past posts I don´t think that you have tested these exact schemes. In these configurations what is looked for is to get the wires cut by the magnetic lines (flux cutting the wires). These sketches are not based on changing the magnetic flux which crosses a coil (flux linking).

Regards

Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1181 on: March 31, 2014, 05:58:14 AM »
Hanon,
It could be that I didn't understand your scetch fully. I'll study it some more.


Several Tests of my 3-Coil Transformer

The test setup consists a wall transformer with AC output, the coils, a rectifier with a LED at the output.
There is also a halfwave separator consisting of 4 diodes, only to test a certain Figuera mode, other than that not in use Voltage was tested in parallel to the LED, Amps in series with it. Watts are calculated not really correctly, this is more about the diffrences between various coil configurations. Efficiency is calculated in the assumption that the power factor is 1.0, but most likely it is less, so the efficieny is higher. Read under "Input" more about this measurement problem.

Jensen Setup (1 primary, 2 secondaries)
full AC wave to primary. secondaries in series:

2.73 VDC,  73.4 mA,  200.3 mW
Efficiency: 62.2%

Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
a halfwave to each primary, flipflop (note: voltage drop due to halfwave separator at input...):

1.75 VDC,  4 mA,  7 mW
Efficiency: 2.1%


Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
full AC wave to left P, right P short circuited:

2.06 VDC, 51.9 mA,  106.9 mW
Efficiency: 33.1%


Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
full AC wave to both P, parallel (non-canceling):

2.7 VDC,  64 mA,  172.8 mW
Efficiency: 53.6%

Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
full AC wave to both P, serial (non-canceling):

2.72 VDC, 77.5 mA,  210.8 mW
Efficiency: 65.4%




Input:

Note: unfortunately I cannot test the Power factor / Phase Shift of the transformer, but it is unlikely that the power factor is 1.0. It may be somewhere between 0 and 1. Furthermore, the power factor may differ in each setup.

When I Use the same Fullbridge rectifier and LED directly at the same power supply (which is then a purely resistive load with a power factor of 1.0) then the dissipation is:

2.98 VDC,  108 mA,  322 mW

So 322 mW would be 100% Efficiency, assuming the power factor is 1.0. If e.g. the power factor in the last test (210.8 mW) would be 0.5 then the efficiency would be 113.8%. But who knows, the power factor could be anything, even 0.1 . (At least based on Theories like Heins' BTT).

It may be silly to post these results at all without information about the power factor / phase shift, but it might be of interest how the various modes perform in comparation. It also shows that my older measurements of a COP 6 may be questionable, nonetheless these were the values when I measured the Input

I've been watching the rectified waveform with Visual Analyzer (no current probe so far, just voltage) and it looks almost the same, regardless of if I have 2 Ps in series and one Secondary (Figuera) or one Primary and two Secondaries in Series (Jensen, Heins) Nonetheless there is a slight smearing of the entire sinus wave, as if it became broader with a bigger duty time.

That's it  for now, got to make me an oscilloscope :/

Regards

Offline NRamaswami

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 490
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1182 on: March 31, 2014, 03:27:16 PM »
Hi Dieter:

Thanks for posting the detailed information on tests.

In the Jensen type central primary surrounded by two secondaries how were the secondaries wound? Was one secondary cw and another CCW or both of them of the same winding type. How was the primary placed? Was the primary placed vertically or it is placed horizontally to face the secondaries? was there a common iron core for magnetic flux to travel? Would be obliged for answers to these doubts. Only thing that I do not understand is that the coil itself would consume some current by its very nature. When you give millivolts and milliamps how can that be efficient. Certain minimum volts and amps must be given.

Thanks again for the very detailed information.

Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1183 on: March 31, 2014, 05:00:36 PM »
NRamaswami,


thanks for your attention. You may not underestimate the power of eg. 0.3 Watt, if I don't fix the two E core parts well, I get very strong vibration. Most important is good coupling. See my previously posted picture of the 3 coils (where copper wire can be seen). It is a small setup and therefor little chanches have great effects, much like micro mechanics, where one has to work with care and sensitive fingertips.


I prefere these small scale tests and I think ferrite has a more linear permeability, allowing me to get results way under saturation. If things once are working, I can scale up. Watching the price of enameled copper wire, I save a lot of $ this way.


In my humble opinion it is irrelevant whether you use cw or ccw, just use the right connection. If eg. in the sec. series the connection is wrong, output is zero due to cancelling. if both are cw, then connect them ns ns.


This whole cw vs ccw business is rather mambo jambo and don smith is wrong about the electron spin affecting efficience and such. Usually I make all cw and connect them accordingly.


Good is: I just had the idea to use my soundcard oscilloscope like this: left channel the signal after the transformer, right channell the signal as it is before the transformer. This may show me the phase shift ...  :o


Maybe...


Regards


Offline hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1184 on: March 31, 2014, 06:23:37 PM »
Shadow,

Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?

If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system  (I_north + I_south = constant)

Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way  to make easier its understanding"

Regards

Hi,

This is what I meant: Using two parallel resistors in a simetrical way will get two complete simetrical waves.

With just one resistor the shape of one wave is conditioned to the remaining resistance in the resistor and, therefore, both waves won´t be never simetrical.

I think that maybe Figuera used two resistors for achieving a constant overall current all the time. Maybe for that reason he wrote in the patent that the resistor system was sketched is a simple way just to make easier its understanding.

Regards