Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE (Read 2358097 times)

norman6538 · « **Reply #3225 on:** March 07, 2016, 08:47:07 PM »

I cobbled together Hanon's posted circuit from a few pages back and tested it
on a test bed I had setup for Flynn, Figuera, and Kunnel tests and got 53v out of
the secondary coil with 120v input. Since the coils are all in the same direction
I had to flip wires to make the poles alike in the center. When they are unlike there
is a solinoid vibration that can be felt and heard. The coils are 900 ohms from the
water in valves in a washing machine. In the back right is a 4th coil that is the resistance that reduces the power in one coil by half - 1800 ohms. And the diodes
are there too. I drew the circuit on the plywood too. That reduced current did
not change the output much....that surprised me. The core is a bolt
and the C clamps are used to hold it in place for rapid prototype changes.

Prior to this my std AC test gave me 43v so Figuera is 23% improvement but nothing
like we want to see.
Do I need to do current tests to nail this down?

Thanks Hanon for showing that circuit. It is so easy to use.

The earlier Kunnel PM tests showed that the PM had little effect on the voltage.
It does not enhance or deter the voltage much. So my conclusion is that
the electric flux out powers the PM flux. Maybe you have some thoughts
on that.

So why do we think we can get these old patents to work after all these years?

Better luck fellow experimenters.

Norman

marathonman · « **Reply #3226 on:** March 08, 2016, 04:32:42 AM »

Sounds like every one is beating there head against a rock with this circuit. the whole reason Figuera did what he did is because when two electromagnets is taken up and down in an orderly fashion a duel e field is created and maintained. when it is pulsed in the circuit you are using it is not plain and simple.
cuss me out all you want but in the long run who is right.

Sir; do you think your ohm's might be just a tad bit high.

Doug1 · « **Reply #3227 on:** March 08, 2016, 01:21:02 PM »

What why and where.

norman6538 · « **Reply #3228 on:** March 08, 2016, 02:00:06 PM »

Marathonman
What is a "duel e field"? one in each coil?

Norman

forest · « **Reply #3229 on:** March 08, 2016, 05:08:53 PM »

Two pulses at 180 degress are fine but how to get two at 90 degrees ?

marathonman · « **Reply #3230 on:** March 08, 2016, 07:53:55 PM »

Yes ! two electromagnets basically occupying the same relative space of the Secondary alternating in time = duel or double strength E field. when one electromagnet is out of sink induction is lost and output drops dramatically.

madddann · « **Reply #3231 on:** March 08, 2016, 11:41:23 PM »

Quote from: marathonman on March 08, 2016, 07:53:55 PM

Yes ! two electromagnets basically occupying the same relative space of the Secondary alternating in time = duel or double strength E field. when one electromagnet is out of sink induction is lost and output drops dramatically.

...and you know this from your experience right? So did you complete your setup with the magnetic amplifier? Are you willing to share any results?

hanon · « **Reply #3232 on:** March 09, 2016, 12:06:47 AM »

Quote from: Doug1 on March 08, 2016, 01:21:02 PM

What why and where.

Those who have a working device should give it a try and see if it work as the resistors array or not. It will just take 5 minutes to build it and test it. I can not say if it work, I can only say that the shape of the signals is really good (see pic attached in my previous post) I also got surprised when I saw the signal in the scope.

You just have to tune the resistor between diodes to achieve a value above zero volts. I think I used around 15 ohms with my set of 2 electromagnets in series in each row. Each row has 5 ohms resistance.

Just trying to help and simplify. Take it or leave it.

madddann · « **Reply #3233 on:** March 09, 2016, 12:35:45 AM »

Quote from: hanon on March 09, 2016, 12:06:47 AM

Those who have a working device should give it a try and see if it work as the resistors array or not. It will just take 5 minutes to build it and test it. I can not say if it work, I can only say that the shape of the signals is really good (see pic attached in my previous post) I also got surprised when I saw the signal in the scope.

You just have to tune the resistor between diodes to achieve a value above zero volts. I think I used around 15 ohms with my set of 2 electromagnets in series in each row. Each row has 5 ohms resistance.

Just trying to help and simplify. Take it or leave it.

Who, when, where? What did I miss?

By working device you mean just the part that feeds the electromagnets, right?

NRamaswami · « **Reply #3234 on:** March 09, 2016, 01:45:05 PM »

When people realize the following things all can have working devices..

1. Primary is larger and secondary has compressed magnetic field from two opposing electromagnets.

2. The rotary device is a spark creator that creates high voltage and high frequency output and that becomes high amperage as well when it hits a copper sheets and that current is fed to the primary.

3. When primary current goes to the earth and part of secondary comes back to the rotary device as pulsed DC input.

4. Feedback coil below the secondary is used to drive the DC motor for the rotary device.

When you realize also that large (very large iron cores are needed) all can build the device.

I have the rotary device, I have the secondary magnets, I have the DC motor and I have the battery but I do not have large high voltage high frequency high amperage capacity wires and very large iron cores. No funds here to buy them. Except that rest of the device is partly available with me. But it is not a working device. Nor a completed device.

Any one desiring to know which polarity works must do the test himself and find out..why ask others?

I intend to do it some time in the future when funds time and staff to do this all are available to me. Not now. Very very expensive project.

marathonman · « **Reply #3235 on:** March 09, 2016, 02:55:45 PM »

madddann;

Yes this is from experience, research and observation of the Figuera device. that is why induction falls off dramatically if one electromagnet is not in sink with the other. two completely separate opposing electromagnets will have a massive e field compared to one electromagnet because of the sharing of same relative space of the secondary, not fiction (FACT).

I am working on my rewinding of my mag amp control. just for reasons of my own i have chosen 400hz cores and 400 hz AC for my mag amps which puts me at around 4 to 5 MS response time being controlled with 60hz timing board which is of course 16.6 MS.

Rswami;
2. The rotary device is a spark creator that creates high voltage and high frequency output and that becomes high amperage as well when it hits a copper sheets and that current is fed to the primary.

Good imagination but not in the Figuera device. i would like for you to please show this forum in the patents this statement.
of course you can't because it is not there and is not what the rotary device is used for.
i'm not trying to be mean or hateful, and definitely not trying to argue just stating FACTS.

the rotary device is a splitter of currant used to take each electromagnet up and down oppositely in an orderly fashion to maintain the e fields generated by each electromagnet over the relative space being occupied by the secondary. (FACT)

Hanon;
You help a lot so keep up the good work.

NRamaswami · « **Reply #3236 on:** March 09, 2016, 05:23:30 PM »

Marathonman..

I agree that is what the patent says.

The 1908 & 1914 patents are significantly different. This made me feel that the 1908 patent may have been edited or redacted. So what is wrong in assuming one possibility that is present.

But I need to concede the patent does not disclose this.

Thanks for not disputing the rest of my statements.

Ramaswami

Quote from: marathonman on March 09, 2016, 02:55:45 PM

madddann;
Yes this is from experience, research and observation of the Figuera device. that is why induction falls off dramatically if one electromagnet is not in sink with the other. two completely separate opposing electromagnets will have a massive e field compared to one electromagnet because of the sharing of same relative space of the secondary, not fiction (FACT).
I am working on my rewinding of my mag amp control. just for reasons of my own i have chosen 400hz cores and 400 hz AC for my mag amps which puts me at around 4 to 5 MS response time being controlled with 60hz timing board which is of course 16.6 MS.
Rswami;
2. The rotary device is a spark creator that creates high voltage and high frequency output and that becomes high amperage as well when it hits a copper sheets and that current is fed to the primary.
Good imagination but not in the Figuera device. i would like for you to please show this forum in the patents this statement. of course you can't because it is not there and is not what the rotary device is used for.i'm not trying to be mean or hateful, and definitely not trying to argue just stating FACTS.
the rotary device is a splitter of currant used to take each electromagnet up and down oppositely in an orderly fashion to maintain the e fields generated by each electromagnet over the relative space being occupied by the secondary. (FACT)
Hanon;You help a lot so keep up the good work.

hanon · « **Reply #3237 on:** March 09, 2016, 05:48:14 PM »

For those who still do not understand the objective of the bad-named "commutator" , really acting as a current distributor:

Berto3 · « **Reply #3238 on:** March 09, 2016, 05:57:42 PM »

@ Rswami
Frankly, I don't understand your worry about the expenses for this Figuera project.
Why not making a small test setup to check the principles? I made a test setup for
50 dollar mainly for ferrite cores, copper and electronic parts. This Figuera setup is
build on a 40x40cm board with all the parts and meters, exept the oscilloscope.
The block- sinus wave oscillator and E-magnet drivers are build at a breadboard.
All is powered by a lead-gel battery of 6V and switchable to super capacitors.
The 2 inductor coils are 10mH and the 2 pickup coils (bifilar) are 40mH 320Ohm.
One of my findings is that sparks, high voltage and high frequency not stands for
more current and real usable power. Yes, a LED will light up more but that's it.
For that reason I made a digital (staircased) sinus. This gives a transfer of power
and spikes. But at the secondary coils I did not pickup excess power, not enough
to deliver back to the primary. I convert all secundary power back to DC and
measured volt and amps to get real power values. Testing is not that expensive.

NRamaswami · « **Reply #3239 on:** March 10, 2016, 05:11:20 AM »

Berto

Bifilar coil cannot be used as pick up coil. It reduces current. Secondary coil must be thick wire. or use the bifilar coil as two parallel wire connected to make single large wire and you will get output.

I'm trying to produce high output power of 8000 watts. I reach it easily when core is saturated but core is heated when saturated. Therefore for sustained and safe operations we need large cores.

I have built the rotary device, I have also a solid state circuit of low voltage and high frequency and I have found High voltage is needed to produce results. What we are trying is an actual replica that can work for a month or so without interruption.

Leds will glow with little current if voltage is adequate.

Both Amperage and voltage is needed for incandescent lamps of high wattage.

When primary is given in parallel splitting is done immediately.

When you try to get a device that can produce 8000 - 12000 watts in a sustained and safe way it is not an inexpensive project. Especially when you try for lower input higher output.

Since your tests are inexpensive try making the pickup coil a thicker coil than primary coils single wire and not bifilar and why not share the results?

A bifilar coil can be used only for input and not for pickup.

regards

Ramaswami

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE (Read 2358097 times)

norman6538

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

marathonman

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

Doug1

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

norman6538

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

forest

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

marathonman

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

madddann

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

hanon

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

madddann

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

NRamaswami

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

marathonman

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

NRamaswami

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

hanon

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

Berto3

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

NRamaswami

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE