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

Custom Search

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE  (Read 2334797 times)

IMIGHTKNOW

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4770 on: March 28, 2023, 05:02:11 AM »
Maybe That's what Cadman was talking about, I think you misunderstand that graph you posted. Look at the induced, I take it as raising one while the other is reduced all while compressing the field lines.


 "If they were the same polarity, they would both be filling at the same time, just at different rates."

You really lost me on that one, without compressing the field lines you have nothing.
I see both electric fields (Induced) in the same direction. Isn't that the point or am I missing something here.

Compression then shift from side to side which is what Cadman was suggesting right?


floodrod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • Mooker.Com- Energy Discovery Forums
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4772 on: March 28, 2023, 01:11:22 PM »
I think you misunderstand that graph you posted. Look at the induced, I take it as raising one while the other is reduced all while compressing the field lines.

The pic you sent me (attached) shows standard induction.  If you are proposing the Clemente device is configured like the image- then you have a standard transformer which is subject to Lenz.

LEFT SIDE-  Magnet motion is opposed from the induced field..
RIGHT SIDE-  Magnet motion is opposed from the induced field...

Yes it will induce good, but every milliwatt you draw from the induced will pull from the source.

Now if you flip one of the magnets in the same motion you cancel Lenz - BUT you also cancel induced power.. Those "Skilled in the art" will understand what I say.

I don't think Clemente is lying in his patent.  I doubt he is labeling NORTH as "S" to deceive us..  But I do believe he is hiding something, either by mistake or on purpose.

I recorded this video about a year ago..  It demonstrates how it is possible to change induced power direction by utilizing properly positioned partial cores.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt-k6KOlip4

As I said earlier, my whole contention is that I am not convinced same poles are used and I am leaning towards the secret being in the core configurations (which the patent is mum about).

CONFESSION TIME--- >  I do NOT have a self-runner...  So my views mean VERY LITTLE-   just like everyone else who does not have a Self-Runner..  So take it as you will..  Someone would be foolish to believe my words when I can not produce OU..  You are free to believe "Compression" is the key, or whatever else you want.  And I have no right to say others are wrong UNLESS I can prove I am right by producing a self-runner.. 

citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4773 on: March 28, 2023, 09:13:27 PM »
Bucking coil tests.


https://rumble.com/v2f7gt0-march-28-2023.html


Just for your information, when I had DC applied to the coils they did not repel or attract and the current did not change when I brought them close to each other in either position.  And of course I did not try to induce any power into the third coil with DC applied to the other two coils.


Carroll

floodrod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • Mooker.Com- Energy Discovery Forums
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4774 on: March 29, 2023, 01:25:09 AM »
Bucking coil tests.

https://rumble.com/v2f7gt0-march-28-2023.html


Yes, you are starting to see what we tried chatting about.  This can be expanded much further.  What you are starting to see can allow you to run loads using the HOT lead of the source as the ground..  OR run loads using the negative lead of the source as the HOT.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXUq0ygRge0&t=28s  You can amplify the voltage in a circuit and make current flow any way you wish...

But I have not found OU with it yet..  Although I am still at it..

 

IMIGHTKNOW

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4775 on: March 29, 2023, 04:07:52 AM »
The pic you sent me (attached) shows standard induction.  If you are proposing the Clemente device is configured like the image- then you have a standard transformer which is subject to Lenz.

LEFT SIDE-  Magnet motion is opposed from the induced field..
RIGHT SIDE-  Magnet motion is opposed from the induced field...

Yes it will induce good, but every milliwatt you draw from the induced will pull from the source.

Now if you flip one of the magnets in the same motion you cancel Lenz - BUT you also cancel induced power.. Those "Skilled in the art" will understand what I say.

I don't think Clemente is lying in his patent.  I doubt he is labeling NORTH as "S" to deceive us..  But I do believe he is hiding something, either by mistake or on purpose.

I recorded this video about a year ago..  It demonstrates how it is possible to change induced power direction by utilizing properly positioned partial cores.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt-k6KOlip4

As I said earlier, my whole contention is that I am not convinced same poles are used and I am leaning towards the secret being in the core configurations (which the patent is mum about).

CONFESSION TIME--- >  I do NOT have a self-runner...  So my views mean VERY LITTLE-   just like everyone else who does not have a Self-Runner..  So take it as you will..  Someone would be foolish to believe my words when I can not produce OU..  You are free to believe "Compression" is the key, or whatever else you want.  And I have no right to say others are wrong UNLESS I can prove I am right by producing a self-runner..

This is not standard transformer action by no means what so ever. I am still scratching my head on some of your assumptions but it is what it is . And no Figuera did not miss label because the labeling was after his north and south hemisphere of his controller not poles of a magnet. well em, just my opinion. ;D
Exactly no one has proof in the open just yet.

What bothers me is it seems the compression electromagnets are not being compressed properly. If no one is getting a thing from the opposing and switching like in that graph just maybe it is the pressure or lack of. I have seen some advice from another person on another forum that someone built the electronic part G and it worked beautifully. So in my mind part G as an inductor was spot on but now dealing with the primary issue. I would think compensating the long reluctance path back to south has to be accounted for plus the gap between the primaries and secondary. I personally think subtle things are being inadvertently overlooked and they must be found then brought out.

floodrod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • Mooker.Com- Energy Discovery Forums
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4776 on: March 29, 2023, 12:59:50 PM »
This is not standard transformer action by no means what so ever. I am still scratching my head on some of your assumptions but it is what it is .

The whole "Gain" mechanism in the Figuera is the ability to beat lenz drag..

QUOTE-  "And this procedure has the advantage that, not having to overcome any drag,
the Lenz's law does not apply and therefore does not need any mechanical
force to overcome this drag and explains so well the production of electrical
energy greater that the inducing one, thus becoming this way a self-exciting
generatrix"

LENZ IN A NUTSHELL--  The direction of current you produce will create a magnetic field that OPPOSES the motion that created it. 

Now look at the image closely... 

LEFT MAGNET...  NORTH pole is pushing in....  And the coil pole becomes NORTH..  The coil opposed the motion because the coil is trying to STOP the magnet's motion.  NORTH and NORTH REPEL......  This is Lenz...

RIGHT MAGNET...  NORTH is going away...  Coil becomes SOUTH..  Once again, the coil trying to STOP the motion of the magnet..  NORTH attracts SOUTH..   This is Lenz.....

This entire configuration will act as a normal transformer, as in-  every milliwatt you extract will be taken from the source supply. And if it were powered from moving magnets, it would slow the movement on all sides (DRAG).

~~~~~~~

Regarding this "Compression"--  Perhaps there may be compression generated in repulsion mode due to the commutator alignment touching several contacts at once in the right order.  Making and breaking in a way that disrupts the smooth waxing and waning.   But then the image attached would not apply.  I am not declaring same poles as "Wrong" because it is still a possibility.  My point is, if this was a regular transformer or generator in this configuration, there would certainly be Lenz.



 The labeling was after his north and south hemisphere of his controller not poles of a magnet


He Labeled the Commutator Hemispheres By Writing N and S on each electromagnet???????  Am I reading this right???



Cadman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4777 on: March 29, 2023, 03:03:00 PM »
Guys, I don’t mean to throw a monkey wrench into your discussion but I would like to elaborate on the drawing I posted. This applies more to Figuera’s last patent and Buforn’s patents.

Doug1 steered my thinking in this direction a long time ago but I ignored it and listened to someone else for my build. :(
https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg378792/#msg378792
He made many other posts regarding this.

Construct the inducer coils using very narrow ‘pie’ coils like the old guys did for induction coils, but not connected in series to make 1 long coil. Not only that but energizing the pies in the sequences shown in my drawing. In effect moving the active coils towards and away from the center induced coil in unison thus moving the compressed center field back and forth in the induced. Flux cutting.

Also if the 2 inducers are, say NN poles facing, the resulting consequent poles between them are a double SS. This has been known since the 1800s. I am absolutely convinced you have to maintain the field strength cutting across the induced.
If you reduce the strength of one inducer coil the other stronger inducer ends up making a weaker pole at the far end of the induced’s core because of the distance.

Oh and one more thing, please stop using solid cores. It’s self defeating.

But of course, these are just my untested thoughts.


floodrod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • Mooker.Com- Energy Discovery Forums
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4778 on: March 29, 2023, 10:49:52 PM »
Construct the inducer coils using very narrow ‘pie’ coils like the old guys did for induction coils, but not connected in series to make 1 long coil. Not only that but energizing the pies in the sequences shown in my drawing.

Yo Cadman..  Trying to visualize it..  Came up with this attached..  8 triggers.  Is this in the ballpark of what you describe?  Intensive build if so, but interesting.. 

IMIGHTKNOW

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4779 on: March 30, 2023, 06:44:06 AM »
There is only two people I have downloaded from this site That I thought has some real insight and Doug was one of them. I remember reading about the multiple winding per primary and the results were as said. One single winding is just way to slow to react to fast current changes, way to much self inductance. Plus the fact about the two primaries being sent 120 volts with 60 volts each was really intriguing.

Again I read from Doug that they are opposing then shifted back and fourth over the secondary. More current is shifted to one then the other vice verse as the brush rotates. The physics I have studied tells me the electric fields are then lined up in the same direction. If this device is to match the high intensity field of a north and south field then  absolutely has to be compressed in my mind.
I just see no other way.

IMIGHTKNOW

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4780 on: March 30, 2023, 06:53:33 AM »

Also if the 2 inducers are, say NN poles facing, the resulting consequent poles between them are a double SS. This has been known since the 1800s.

Oh and one more thing, please stop using solid cores. It’s self defeating.

Poles are only NN and double SS only of both are powered up at the same time. Figuera did not do this. one rising one falling and vice verse so statement doesn't apply making the graph posted valid.

Primaries can be solid cores because they never reverse only rise and fall. Secondary on the other hand is subjected to AC so yes solid core would be a failure for sure for the secondary due to eddies.

Again no this is not a transformer because the electric field in a transformer do not line up like this switching does in the graph. It is an absolute fact that the Lenz will always be there but in my mind with this type of switching Figuera worked with the Lenz law not totally against it like in a standard generator.

A transformer shares it's load with two coils and so it would seem this device does not.

 

Cadman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4781 on: March 30, 2023, 02:44:17 PM »
floodrod, yes that’s the way the individual coils would be constructed but the wiring between those two groups is anybody’s guess.

IMIGHTKNOW, varying the magnetic field through the core will induce eddy currents, it doesn't have to reverse polarities.

@all
You guys see why I haven't tried to build one this way. The operation doesn’t match any of the patents and it’s way too complicated to operate. But it is the only way I can think of to duplicate Hanon’s video device without physical movement.

That said, constructing the individual exciter coils with pies or rings connected in parallel like Doug1 said makes a lot of sense in order to have “a group of real electromagnets, properly built to develop the highest possible attractive force” and still have a short enough time constant to magnetize and demagnetize those electromagnets 30 to 100 times per second. He didn’t have today’s electrical steels, just soft iron.

Nowadays I’m leaning heavily towards patent 30378 as the way to go. It doesn’t mention anything about commutators at all. And I can see strong analogies in this patent to the HES generators.


floodrod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • Mooker.Com- Energy Discovery Forums
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4782 on: March 30, 2023, 03:54:27 PM »
Interesting-  but yes, hard build..

Couldn't the filling / emptying cycle be done with a rotor and 2 pickup coils?  If we use 2 coils sideways so they induct 1 way current when facing the magnets, we could offset 2 coils so the 2 separate DC pulses align exactly where 1 is at peak where the other is at bottom.  So when 1 grows, the other shrinks. And of course a pickup coil between the electromagnets.


citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4783 on: March 30, 2023, 05:02:43 PM »
For testing purposes there is an easier way to do that.  I just modified my circuit that I showed in the previous video.  All I did was put two diodes in one of the AC lines.  With them connected in parallel I connected the anode of diode to one side of one of my coils and connected the other diode with the cathode going to other coil and the opposite ends of my coils going back to the return of the AC source.  I go some interesting results.


Since my coils are now connected in parallel instead of series I got an increase in current which I expected.  My AC current is now 1.04 amps with the secondary unloaded.  And because my power supply is not well regulated in AC mode my voltage dropped to 15.9 volts.  However when I connected my 10 ohm 10 watt resistor across my secondary as my load the input current dropped!  The input current went from 1.04 amps down to 1.02 amps.  And my output is also slightly higher which is to be expected with each coil drawing more current than before.  My output across the 10 ohm resistor is now 2.99 volts for a calculated power of 895 milliwatts.  That compares to 812 milliwatts I showed in the video. 


If you do the calculations you will see that for an output from zero with no load to an output of 895 milliwatts my input dropped by 320 milliwatts.  If you remember from the video my input went up by 150 or so milliwatts for an output of 812 milliwatts but now by switching to halfwaves going to each coil my input goes DOWN by 320 milliwatts for a slightly greater output of 895 milliwatts.  So powering each coil with half wave power is a step in the right direction.  As you saw in the video my setup is pretty crude.  I need to get a longer core that goes all the way through all 3 coils and I need to experiment with different core material and I need to find a good source of clean AC power that has the frequency adjustable,  I believe a higher frequency would also give better results.  The AC from my power supply is just stepped down 60 Hz.  I also probably need to test using different input voltages.  Too many ideas and not enough time.


Carroll

IMIGHTKNOW

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #4784 on: March 30, 2023, 05:16:06 PM »
floodrod, yes that’s the way the individual coils would be constructed but the wiring between those two groups is anybody’s guess.

IMIGHTKNOW, varying the magnetic field through the core will induce eddy currents, it doesn't have to reverse polarities.

@all
You guys see why I haven't tried to build one this way. The operation doesn’t match any of the patents and it’s way too complicated to operate. But it is the only way I can think of to duplicate Hanon’s video device without physical movement.

That said, constructing the individual exciter coils with pies or rings connected in parallel like Doug1 said makes a lot of sense in order to have “a group of real electromagnets, properly built to develop the highest possible attractive force” and still have a short enough time constant to magnetize and demagnetize those electromagnets 30 to 100 times per second. He didn’t have today’s electrical steels, just soft iron.

Nowadays I’m leaning heavily towards patent 30378 as the way to go. It doesn’t mention anything about commutators at all. And I can see strong analogies in this patent to the HES generators.

I think it is a give in that being wound specifically as electromagnets necessitate multiple or sectional winding as to the fact that Part G controls current flow.

You contradict yourself again stating to me that eddies are still present then go on to state Figuera had soft iron cores. I am well aware there will be some eddies if the primaries are solid soft iron. My problem is apparently Figuera did not get your memo to not use it.  ;D Primaries will attain the highest mag possible using soft iron in the primaries. Secondaries in the other hand NO!. Way to much eddies and Hysteresis. The problem with that is soft Iron is crazy expensive so that is definitely out.

I am stumped as to why you keep referring to someone that has built nothing. The reference to shifting the fields back and fourth are or were gotten from Doug posts and the patent. I have read his entire site and I am amazed as to why people think he adds anything extra that can not be found in the patent. I mean no disrespect what so ever but I agree with marathonman when we spoke through a PM on his site that he adds nothing new that is not on the table already. Again no disrespect intended!. I was even informed by him that Hanon has some of his Paint graphs that he made on his site which I do find hilarious to say that least given some people think he is so special. If he was so special in knowledge then why use someone else's material. Again no disrespect intended!.

All I am doing is gathering information I can then use a physics standpoint moving forward with that trying to minimize my own interpretation using real physics from that time period not the tainted physics of present day. I just acquired many old books on physics and magnetism from that time frame which so far corroborate Doug1 posts completely.

The whole idea of the patent as of my understanding is compressing the field lines then shifting those fields from side to side over the secondary which on a physics standpoint aligns the electric fields of the two electromagnets. My only real concern is just how is the secondary fed back into the system? :o The rest is guided by physics not hearsay, maybe's or what if's.

PS. Progressively altering the current flow to each set of electromagnets with no current interruption which will cause BEMF and field collapse.