I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.

 
I would say a varying DC because Induction only comes from flux change and the PMs enhance that flux output.
And he prevents Lenz counter to motion forces by not moving anything. So it seems the losses would only be resistance to flux change and the enhancement comes from the PM flux. The auto radiator and blower motors all have 2 ceramic half magnets that supply some of the flux and so does the motor in my elec bicycle. lots of noeos in there.

Norman

No generator or transformer including Figuera produces pulsating DC. Only way to produce DC would be to increase flux continuously to infinity (or decrease it from infinitely large flux toward 0). That is of course impossible.

On every single patent, it shows the 2nd series electromagnet array entering the first coil on the opposite side of the first electromagnet.  But only on 1 side..  The other side enters and exits each electromagnet on the same side.

I have pondered this for weeks..  Why wouldn't they draw the positive feed where my red line is to match the first array?

Is it possible the first side is all North (N,N,N,N,N,N,N)
And the 2nd side is one South followed by all North (S,N,N, N,N,N,N)

I can't think of any other reason for this, and I do not think it's a slipup that coincidently happened on every patent.

Is there a simple explanation I am missing?

pulsed dc output

As i said no generator or transformer including Figuera produces pulsating DC. Only way to produce DC would be to increase flux continuously to infinity (or decrease it from infinitely large flux toward 0). That is of course impossible.

We are obviously not talking diodes or some other method of rectifying the output. Induction itself is always AC. Unless we get into scalar waves and higher energy forms, Schwartz for example says his ERR box is producing DC with small AC component), but that is totally different pair of shoes.

be that as it may, the above produces a good pulsed dc output.

It does not. It is unclear what exactly have you imagined in the diagram, it seems flawed polarity wise, i have seen many similar Figuera suggestions over the years. But it does not really matter.

ALL induction configurations produce AC.

Coil will produce voltage of one polarity while it sees increase of flux in certain direction.

As long as flux in that direction keeps increasing voltage of that polarity will be induced, if it is increasing at constant rate flat DC voltage will be induced.

If the rate of increase is changing pulsed DC will result.

But the very moment that flux stops increasing there will be no more induced voltage.

And if that flux starts to decrease voltage of opposite polarity will be induced in same manner.

So, as i said, unless flux in one direction is increasing to infinity, which is of course impossible, you cannot get pulsed DC by induction, not in the generator not in the transformer.

Feeding transformer a pulsed DC results in AC, etc.

You may get almost pure pulsed DC by shoving magnet into the coil very fast and then pulling it back very slowly so opposite polarity voltage would be very small. But that is still AC.

I understand what your saying in general and you are correct, however,  the diagram shows a pulsed dc input on each side of the induced coil.   This results in a single polarity output - no reversal - simply a rise and fall of flux through the coil. 

Another example of this would be a long solenoid coil with lots of wire, with one pole of a magnet you start at one end of the coil and move the magnet toward the other end, you'll see a continuous current of one polarity until you reach the end.   Simply repeat this sequence over and  over to produce a pulsed output of a certain polarity.

I understand what you are trying to say but there is no induction in such case.

If you got a long coil, does not even have to have many turns, just 1 layer is enough, and you drop the magnet,
lenz (induction) will manifest only upon entering and leaving of the long coil.

When magnet is inside, turns above the magnet see that flux decreasing while the turns below the magnt see it increasing, you got two equal and opposite voltages canceling out.

There is no induction in such case.

There is a video demonstration of this on youtube. I may link it. Guy is surprized how closed coil provides no more resistance to fall of magnet than an open. Well, for given reason.

This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.
https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html

I understand you envision it like that, it has been envisioned in similar manner for many years here.

Fact remains if magnet falls through a long coil as you proposed there will be no induction except when it enters and leaves, and it will be AC.

As for your video, you are sliding face of the magnet across one side of the coil, so that is a very different story and is similar to something i used to do, two big multi year projects based on an idea of two opposite magnets N to N on opposite sides of a toroid coil cutting wire and that induced field in the toroid has no choice but to be at 90° to the main (vertical) magnet fluxes, i was expecting pure DC voltage from it for flux always cuts wire in one direction, but it ultimately failed, induced voltage was too low. But nevermind that.

In your video side fluxes cancel out, two equal and opposite side fluxes are linking with the coils. Main induction in your video is due to central vertical flux. Such induction should theoretically produce DC, i in fact i spent large amount of money and years of work on two different models of such generators that were not meant to be.

Anyway, you can check the output waveform when you do the induction on the side like that, make the coil longer cause at the poles it will surely be AC. According to these it is not but they used iron core.

http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/7086-generator-with-lenz-less-toroidal-stator

*Here, this guy confirms what i wrote above that voltages inside the coil cancel out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkrwy1KjcBQ

Sounds like you had some awesome projects regardless the outcome.   Would have liked to be there looking over your shoulder... sounds fun!  I've also worked with a double north opposing in a similar manor.  It seems to me that a closed toroid wouldn't function as a generator like that but an open magnetic circuit would.   A closed circuit would need at least 2 poles and commutator to extract the dc - similar to how Gramme built his originally in the 1800's.   They used a toroid and NN SS configuration to move the flux through the rotor and commutator to maintain a dc output.   Brush build quite a few similar before he moved on to other designs again in the 1800's.  ( US189997)

Regarding the magnet down the coil, the dynamics are different using a magnet with both poles or sliding down a solenoid with a single pole.   The latter would be more like a generator where the coil wires are cutting through the magnetic flux field as the magnet moves along the coil.   The voltage would be dictated by the amount of turns within the area of the magnetic field and current by the resistance of the entire coil.   The part within the flux field would be generating an output where the balance of the coil would basically be distribution.   

The little solenoid does produce a dc output on the scope.   I built a similar solenoid about a foot long with a reasonable amount of wire which had 4 coils on the outside.   Each coil activated in sequence along the length, also producing a pulsed dc output.   

I'm not sure what you were referring to in the energetic forum link, the google search only brings up and error.   Good conversation !! We can learn a lot comparing notes...