Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE (Read 2364742 times)

Cadman · « **Reply #1425 on:** August 11, 2014, 03:34:17 PM »

Hello All,

I have a question that may be extremely important. With the Figuera/Buforn setup there is one induced coil between two inducing coils. With the commutator through resistor setup shown in the 1908 patent varying the DC exciting current does the polarity of the magnetic circuit in the IRON actually reverse polarity? Or do the poles in the iron just vary in intensity?

I have been calculating the watts lost in the soft iron over and over and this question looks like the key to whether the design will work or not. If the iron polarity reverses the watts lost always exceed the output unless the frequency is extremely low and then the net output is very low. At least on paper.

This question does not apply to the 1902 patent with the rotating coils.

Can anyone provide a definite answer from actual testing?

Thanks and Regards

antijon · « **Reply #1426 on:** August 11, 2014, 05:57:20 PM »

Hi Cadman, et all... That's a good question. Judging by the commutator and just taking a wild guess at the driving motors RPM, I'd say the output waveform of the inducing coils is less than 60HZ. Of course, that's not really pertinent info...

If the coils, all three, were arranged on a single shaft with poles facing, like a dual primary transformer, the flux in the induced coil cannot change polarity. This is if we're feeding it DC pulses, out of phase. From my experience, along with common sense, if the two primary coils are opposing, there will be no significant output.

From Figuera's descriptions, there is a magnetic field that varies in intensity and direction. He describes the output as being AC, which can be made DC with a switch, therefore, from what you say, the coils must not be 3 on a common axis.

I'm including a photo, edited, to show what I think is the proper way to make the coils. From what I can understand, this is also how Stupify12 describes it. The photo was taken from a patent that hanon uploaded back on page 30-something, which I'm re-sharing. I've edited it to replace the permanent magnet in the patent with a second primary.

This patent, in my eyes, is the modern-day Figuera dynamo. Seriously, I think hanon needs to get an award or something for the info he digs up.

Last photo is a section cut from another of Figuera's patents that I found by googling "figuera buforn patent". We can clearly see the different arrangement with the "N", "S", and "y" coils. I think this is evidence that points to my first photo being correct.

What do you think, guys?

marathonman · « **Reply #1427 on:** August 13, 2014, 10:12:27 PM »

The Primaries do not change polarity just intensity only the secondaries change polarity,their would be to much loss if they were switching so that means that the primaries could possibly use Grain oriented Iron having good magnetic induction in one direction and poorly in reverse while the Secondary should be NON Grain oriented or Good Quality Iron to allow for good induction in both direction with little Remanence. at least that's my two cents worth.
Also the primaries are never zero volts so the output core will be less magnetic resistance than the opposite core then if there is Bemf in secondary the opposite primary core will be less resistance than the induced core thus absorbing any Bemf into opposite core being of opposite polarity.(Attraction mode)

hanon · « **Reply #1428 on:** August 14, 2014, 07:30:09 PM »

Hi everyone,

About the patent from 1908 with the variable magnetic fields:

I have found a video which (I think) presents the ESSENCE of the Figuera motionless generator

In this video it is presented the motor version where the coil is energized to create motion. But, the very same concept can be used to create a motionless generator. If you create two magnetic fields and you swing them back and forth then an induced current will be collected in the intermediate coil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMHmLgXWR1U

Therefore a motionless generator can be built with two variable magnetic fields without moving any piece at all !!

In the video two magnetic fields with LIKE POLES FACING EACH OTHER are used. (this patent from 1908 is radically different from those filed by Figuera in 1902 and that he sold to a banker union). The same Youtube user has more videos where he optimizes this idea: closing the magnetic circuit and adding more magnets increase the power of this device without using any more input current.

We should try every possible pole configuration N-N, S-S, N-S,... Remenber that Figuera did not stated explicitly the pole orientation. He used the notation "N rectangle" and "S rectangle" but he never said North nor South (which I found really weird). He did not clarified the exact pole orientation in any part of the patent nor in the patent claims. ( Link to patent text )

Please post your comments. I think that this video it is very interesting for everyone to think deep in this device.

Regards

marathonman · « **Reply #1429 on:** August 14, 2014, 10:32:37 PM »

Hanon we have disgust this set up before many moons ago. it could be set up with little to no cost to find out. everyone already knows that an Electromagnet is many, many times more powerful than a magnet can ever be. i just think that the bloch wall between the NN or SS should not be swung past the end of the coil. this would insure different polarities at coil ends (correct) so this means that the opposite inducer should never reach Zero just varying the intensity of the currant.
in the pic below is this what you are talking about.of course i don't have a core present though.
I will be ordering a 300 Watt Resistor with multiple taps from NTE this week end so i will test the viability of this set up. i can use my two channel or my 9 channel Figueras timing boards it makes no difference. i have a few variacs lying around so i can run it through a bridge rectifier for my 100 volts. i will post my findings as soon as i can.

antijon · « **Reply #1430 on:** August 15, 2014, 03:09:11 AM »

Hey guys.
Hanon, nice vid, a good example to learn from. So what you and marathonman (pleasure to meet you, marathonman) are saying is that:
1. There is a single inductor, and all three coils are mounted on it axially
2. Primary polarities oppose and vary in current
3. Most importantly, length of the inductor, as well as size of the secondary, must be sized properly to the frequency and amplitude of the primary current.

Hanon, what are your thoughts about the pic I uploaded showing the different arrangements of the coils? It does look like all the coils could be mounted axially, but it also appears that the inductor overlaps the secondary, ya?

antijon · « **Reply #1431 on:** August 15, 2014, 03:31:38 AM »

http://youtu.be/-eTQ49RcFKM

Gotoluc's updated permanent magnet motor, showing the increase in motor strength with the addition of more flux paths. Haha, i think I just answered my own question, hanon.

hanon · « **Reply #1432 on:** August 15, 2014, 05:03:27 PM »

Antijon,

The coil configuration that you posted before is from the last patent by Buforn, in 1914.

This patent is just an optimization over the original Figuera patent from 1908.

Buforn explains that this piled linear arragement is used to profit from both poles of each electromagnets

This CONFIRMS that the basic coil arragement is in a linear pattern with a pole without use, as the picture I uploaded previously.

Two variable field inductor electromagnets one in each side and one intermediate induced coil.

Cadman · « **Reply #1433 on:** August 15, 2014, 06:00:11 PM »

Hi everyone,

Thank you for your thoughts about the magnetic polarity change.

This may be another design concern with the 1908 design.

In a normal self excited DC generator there is a relationship between the magnetic circuit and the number of ampere turns of the field coils. For instance the field coils may require 1532 turns of #22 AWG wire, 35.9 ohms, with 26 volts at 0.724 amps to deliver the necessary 1109 ampere turns at the generator's normal operating conditions. However, this is a constant 0.724 amps. With the Figuera commutator alternately increasing the current in one field coil while decreasing the current in the next coil, the net average between the two field coils will be half of the current available to the commutator, or 0.362 A. Correct? This would lower the ampere turns to 554.5 per coil and the generator would not work correctly.

Since the Figuera / Buforn design is self exciting and outputs AC current, the solution in my mind would be to use a small step up transformer ahead of the the rectifier to double the voltage and get the average current to the field coils up where it needs to be. The loss increase caused by the transformer would still be an insignificant portion of the generator output.

Do you think this an accurate overview of the situation and a viable solution? Or am I looking at this all wrong.

Regards

antijon · « **Reply #1434 on:** August 16, 2014, 04:13:52 AM »

Hey Cadman. I don't think that modification would be necessary, and here's why. If you look at the photo that Marathonman posted, you see the fields "breaking out" at the center of the output coil. Now if the action that produces output is based on that "breaking out" point sweeping through the coil, then the amp-turns aren't as critical.

My initial thoughts about the Figuera generator was some special phase/transformer action, something that produced some special output. But like you said, under normal conditions and effects, it won't produce good output. So I've been trying to wrap my head around the actual action, the method that produces the effect. If you watched Gotoluc's videos, you'll see what it is. Like Marathonman's photo, it's the sweeping field that produces current.

To simplify the action, you need two like poles "breaking-out" at the center of the output coil. Then you move it back and forth. I've attached the circuit that I tried last night on my dual-primary transformer. The two primaries are arranged with like-poles facing each other. The purpose of the resistor is to provide a constant current to both coils. As the center-tapped transformer goes through 180 degrees, it produces the sweeping effect. As it is shown, this did produce more output than if the two primaries were simply wired in series and fed AC from the transformer..

In my opinion, the action is incredibly simple. It can be produced in many ways. Say, with two permanent magnets, like poles facing, and two primaries being fed AC. Or with two DC coils and two AC coils.

antijon · « **Reply #1435 on:** August 16, 2014, 05:37:46 AM »

Little animation I made to demonstrate the flux cutting the coil

marathonman · « **Reply #1436 on:** August 16, 2014, 05:50:21 AM »

Antijon Good to meet you to! (Welcome)
another thing to consider is the two opposing polarities with sweeping break outs as you say will be doubled, both magnetic Flux paths added together as they are compressed as it is swept from side to side so this also effects the amper turn ratio. my two channel board will slam this side to side faster than my 9 channel would so ill hook this up to an NTE 300 watt variable tap resistor. this will allow for some fine tuning on the sweeping width.
i think this is a critical tuning step as the flux can not be brought out to far....i think it should not pass up the coil as i think the currant will momentarily drop....hummm i will watch this carefully and post findings.

marathonman · « **Reply #1437 on:** August 16, 2014, 04:53:57 PM »

I got to thinking this morning and why can't we use a North and a South Pinch Effect core. the picture below should work if you ask me as long as the north and the south are in Unison (Correct) the output core will will be between the NN and the SS Electromagnets.
in this arrangement it could be modular and one could easily add more modules to get more output i.e. NN, SS, NN, SS, NN, SS.... get my drift..... with a core in between each one.

hanon · « **Reply #1438 on:** August 16, 2014, 06:14:52 PM »

One small historical pearl from one of the Buforn patent's that you all will love.

INPUT: 100 Watts ( 1 Ampere @ 100 Volts )

OUTPUT: 20,000 Watts

In other paragraph of the patent, Buforn states that the output was 300 A. Therefore the final voltage delivered by the 7 induction stages in series was around 60 V, more or less 10 V per stage.
.
(Edited to reduce image size)
.

forest · « **Reply #1439 on:** August 16, 2014, 08:54:33 PM »

hanon

Can you post link to www page where you posted all Figuera and Buforn patents with translations ?

I think it is now quite clear how they worked, in theory.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE (Read 2364742 times)

Cadman

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

antijon

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

hanon

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

antijon

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

antijon

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

Cadman

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

antijon

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

antijon

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

marathonman

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

forest

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