Saw the video but didn't notice the part where he explains how Lenz is not there.

You put two coils in series on a toroid and it magically has no Lenz problems?

Now that's  funny any way you look at it.
That's exactly why Figueras split up the cores.

Doug1; I to lost many, many years of research on a storage drive. i will have to pay a lot to retrieve it but i need the research material. suck don't it !

when i posted my device the way i had it wired it would of been CW, CCW, CW, CCW ect.... but after looking at the way Figueras had it wired from my post 2632 i have realized that all the output cores are wired CW.  this device can be wired in different ways so this is just for the post 2632 not my previous post.it is still correct.

Marathonman,
 
If you draw an imaginary  line from the center of the pole of one electromagnets to the center of the pole of the other electromagnet you will have determined the axis along which induction is done symmetrically. Let´s say that there is a radial symmetry from this axis . Induction does not know about left, right, up, down from this axis: the same action is done equally in all directions.
 
In your design if you place the induced coil just in the center then the induction creation to the left side is compensated by the induction to the right side, therefore no net result will be obtained.
 
The only way that your design had any chance to work is if you place the induced coil de-centered (out from the center) . For example, placing all induced coils to the left of the induction axis, or placing them slight “in front” respect to the axis (let´s say outside the plane of the paper in your sketch) 

hanon, now that you mention it, it appears only the outer most coils will be producing current. However, if the complete set was separated into groups that problem could be avoided. Such as 4 groups, each containing 2 output coils with their exciters.

But in light of this, it doesn't seem likely that this is Figueras design. If this is arranged in a straight line, matching the latest Buforn patent, little to no output should be induced.

Lenz law is simply a prediction of the direction of current and magnetic fields produced by induction. http://www.vias.org/matsch_capmag/wrapnt5A50E8_inductance___electromagnetic_br_energy_conversion.html This is a good site to learn about induction.

The ring dynamo did have less back-torque. This doesn't mean that it avoided Lenz law, it means that it had very poor induction. At high outputs, efficiency drops to nill. To counter this exciter current would need to be increased, but because of the low induction, saturation would soon follow. Basically, you'd need a ring dynamo the size of Manhattan just to power the city of Manhattan.

Well, I was rereading the patents to try to get more information.

@Hanon, how many times have you read about a switch in the device?

In the image, which I'm sure we're all familiar with, is something that's never been discussed. This cylinder may actually be a switch, similar to a commutator. I remember that Tesla used these in some of his high frequency patents. The triangle commutator shapes allow the brushes to be slid up and down the cylinder to adjust the timing, or duty-cycle.

In reference to the engineer report found here: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf

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.

Also, quote from "Key Parts of Buforn Patent No. 57955" found here: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/Bf_1.pdf

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 a 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 in to 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.

And finally, a quote from Figueras 1908 patent, found here: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf

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

Starting with the Buforn description in the second quote, the coils will be arranged as three inductors with poles all facing each other.

S=Inducer=N  =Induced= S=Inducer=N

Note that when he says "core" he's referring to the coil of wire. Basically, they are arranged as a typical generator, two electromagnets outside of the armature. When he says there should not be any communication between the induced and inducer, I can only think he's referring to a shunt or series DC generator that directly uses the current to power the field magnets.

So I've simulated the output based on this coil configuration, including the commutator and resistor set and inserted the switch before the commutator. If the switch was active during normal operation, and powered by DC, the object was to change polarity of the input somewhere in the revolution of the commutator. The only option here is to change polarity when the commutator is at the center of the resistor. This would have the effect of reversing the magnetic field, simulating a rotation, and producing an AC output.

If the switch was removed, and only + or - DC was being fed to the commutator, a pulsed DC output would be produced. As referenced by Figueras quote.

I think what's important here, when trying to build a static generator, is that we recreate all of the parameters of the device. If a typical generator is examined, it's static mirror is a typical transformer, which does not produce the same effect. We must also consider the fact that a generator includes a variable inductance.

If Figueras generator simulated a variable inductance, it may be when the one coil is decreasing and the other is increasing. When the currents are equal and opposite, the magnetic fields would oppose each other, and this may create a sense of reduced induction in the induced coil. If that's true then we can mimic his concept without using his commutator and switch.

@marathonman, I don't know what your problem is. I don't agree with your idea, I think it's unworkable. I said this the first time you mentioned it. Is this some kind of popularity contest for you?

PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION
Considering carefully what happens in a dynamo in motion, we see that the coil turns of the induction circuit
approach and move away from the magnetic center of the magnets or electromagnets, and those turns, while
spinning, pass through sections of the magnetic field of different magnetic strengths, because, while the
maximum magnetic strength is in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action weakens as the
induction coil moves away from the center of the electromagnet, only to increase again when it is approaching the
center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.
Because we all know that the effects seen when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic
center are the same as when the circuit is motionless and the magnetic field increased and decreased in intensity,
since any variation of the magnetic flow traversing a circuit produces an induced electrical current. Then,
consideration was given to the possibility of building a machine which would work, based, not on the principle of
movement as current dynamos do, but based on the principle of increasing and decreasing the strength of the
magnetic field, or the strength of the electrical current which produces it.

this statement taken Directly from the Patent tells me i am right on track and no one will tell me other wise.

 marathonman,

I really want your discovery to work. I have a feeling that the solution to this device could
be something as simple as your suggestion.
I seems there couldn't be some weird secret from the time when this discovery was made.
I don't know, but I wish you the best of luck.
Also, I feel like a lot of people don't want someone other that themselves to find the answer.

Shadow 119g

I thank you for the confidence.
apparently some people are having a hard time visualizing what is going on in figueras device, maybe this pic will clear it up.
north and south coils working together.

shadow119g your last sentence said it all.